/liberty/ - Liberty

>>68622

Confiscated property would generally end up back in the hands of the victim or their next of kin. I predict big bucks for law firms that specialize in going through government records, finding what happened to your car or gun or whatever, and defending your claim to it in court.

>>68623

But what about public spaces. Parks, squares, stadiums, highways, things that took billions of dollars and millions of citizens to produce

>>68624

>highways

I know not about the rest of it, but potentially getting rid of the highway system is sweet manna. The highways killed trains and encouraged sprawl. We know what IS. We do not see what could have been. What about a world where train technology and infrastructure never stalled? We have some inkling of what the trains would be today if the highways weren't around.

Wonder if the Native Americans might try to reclaim some of their land.

>>68688

Let them try. Maybe they can show that they acquired it without slaughter and robbery. Native Americans weren't exactly the peaceful type.

>>68696

>There is a reason why it was the Soviets with the most advanced railways: not only could they draw the line from point A to point B and don't give a fuck who exactly owns what in-between those two points, but could also centrally organize transportation - a thing that is quite hard to accomplish in unpredictable market economy.

You heard it, guys: There is no way the market can manage railways. Gotta get a time machine and tell 19th century England and the US that they need to adopt socialism so as to have such a magnificent railway system as that of the former Soviet Union.

>>68697

> You heard it, guys: There is no way the market can manage railways.

It's like you are forced to resort to strawmanning due to inability to challenge opinions of real people.

But that cannot be the case, right?

>>68699

The biggest free lunch ever

>>68622

Probably it will all be auctioned off to the highest bidder in order to pay back the debt of the state held by private individuals (foreign states can get fucked).

This is why I don't like the idea of just jumping straight to a stateless society and would prefer a strict minarchist state as a transition over maybe a generation to a stateless society by slowly selling state assets in a structured manner while making sure that people can become acclimatised to having no state so they don't just go insane.

If you wanted to get fancy you could use technologies like blockchain and cryptocurrencies to instil trust in such a process and distribute any leftovers back to taxpayers.

>>68688

>their land

The original owners of that land are long gone, killed by the people who were killed by the people who were killed by the people who we now call the 'Native American Indians'.

In such scenarios, where the person or group who the item is stolen from themselves stole it from someone else (and so on), the only two groups who matter are the original owners and the current owners. In the case of the land in the US the original owners are dead so the only ones who matter are the current owners. In other words, the Native American Indians can go fuck themselves.

>>68699

>It's like you are forced to resort to strawmanning

I responded to your exact comment, which clearly said that the market cannot provide a railway. Case in point:

>>68696

>How the hell are you going to pull off development of trains in your ancapistan?

Through the market. You implied that, instead, we need socialist policies to do so. You didn't go so far as to claim that the USSR was the first country with a railway, but that's where you would've arrived if you had thought this through with your flawed premises.

Development of trains is a non issue. It's the same as the roads argument.

>>68704

> Probably it will all be auctioned off to the highest bidder in order to pay back the debt of the state held by private individuals

Koch program?

> If you wanted to get fancy you could use technologies like blockchain and cryptocurrencies to instil trust in such a process and distribute any leftovers back to taxpayers.

I don't think this is going to instil any trust.

>>68705

> I responded to your exact comment, which clearly said that the market cannot provide a railway.

It clearly referred to further development (improvement) of railways - as opposed to current situation, where highways get priority, since they provide logistical benefits in unpredictable market economy.

> You implied that, instead, we need socialist policies to do so.

I provided the information that clarified where I come from - what is the context of the question I asked. Information that would help answering it.

However, you started accusing me instead of answering the question. Are you unable to answer?

>>68704

>This is why I don't like the idea of just jumping straight to a stateless society and would prefer a strict minarchist state as a transition over maybe a generation to a stateless society by slowly selling state assets in a structured manner while making sure that people can become acclimatised to having no state so they don't just go insane.

How are you going to tame the beast and prevent it from turning into another America? If anything, stolen assets should be held by private entities to be reimbursed to the victims. When you advocate even the tiniest form of government, you're saying there should be a group of people above everyone else, even if its just for a short amount of time.