/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>14595283
I don't want any niggers in my ancap utopia.
Only child slaves

>>14595283
Ancaps rule ok

>>14595283
unironically fits perfectly with SNTVT team

Not even kidding someone on their marketing is ancap

You can't have an AnCap society while coexisting with Jews who want to flood your country with <80 IQ africanoid brainlets you fucking idiot

>>14595376
>caring about what low IQ people do
Poorfag spotted

>>14595376
Actually you can dumbfuck, the only reason why they come is because of the welfare state
If welfare were removed all the snackbars and dindus would evaporate overnight
Go the fuck back to pop you low iq subhuman

*slow clap*

>>14595413
>if welfare were removed

Stopped reading there. Jews won't allow it. Fuck you.

>we need to tax your income 50% to pay for Tyrone's welfare, it's for the collective good. Why are you mad, why don't you have any empathy for your fellow human beings?
>we need to tax your income 50% to pay for Cletus' trailer, it's for the good of the white race. Why are you mad, why don't you have any racial pride?
All forms of collectivism are for weak cucks who can't make it on their own. Prove me wrong.

Tfw my hatred for jews brought me closer to muslims because they hate jews even more than I do

>>14595283
Based

ancap is decentralised fascism
and here's why that's gold thing

if you are older than the age of 16 and are an ancap then there is no hope for you, i'm sorry

>/biz/ has a political ideology

Dude I'm just here for the $

>>14595832
>If you don't like having nogunz and being forced to pay 40% effective tax then you must be 16 mentally
Found the liberal statist cuck.

>>14595903
That's the best political ideology for earning money though.

>>14595413
Step 1: Get rid of welfare via some magic.
Step 2: Wait for eternity for step 1 to happen while your country gets overrun and you eventually get raped to death by enrichment.

biz is accelerationist

>>14596005
anarcho syndicalist but nice try

>>14595283
The lines between ancap and nationalists are blurry now though. Look at Stefan Molyneux and Chris Cantwell. The Ron Paul crowd moving to Trump. The physical removal and free helicopter ride memes. Either would result in pretty similar societies. You protect property lines as strictly as a nationalist protects borders, allow businesses to discriminate, allow complete freedom of association and disassociation, let welfare reliant people starve, let charities pay people to breed or to not breed, end all foreign aid, shoot people who won't get off your lawn.. what kind of world are you left with?

>>14595283

>>14596157
Natsocs don't believe in any of that though. They just want welfare but for white people. They think the richest white person should be robbed to pay for the poor low IQ whites just to exist.

Hell, there's even a thread on the front page of /pol/ RIGHT NOW white-knighting for some low IQ porn star. Why? Because she's white, of course.

>>14596208
Natsoc means making porn illegal, you’re an actual retard

>>14596228
And welfare for useless white people such as yourself. No thanks.

>>14596208
And libertarians NEVER defend porn stars or pornography...

>>14596234
And you’re a high iq elite right?

The state of delusional ancaps

>>14596152
Aka retard.

>>14596236
Lmfao rekt

Most libertarians are literally chronic masturbators and porn addicts

>>14596257
I make a lot of money and pay a lot of taxes.

Why do you think I owe you anything? Because we have the same color of skin? Fuck you.

>>14596272
As if you even have anything to give me. I’m sure you’re a CEO and a millionaire in your mind

Ancaps are so pathetic

>>14595283
>physical removal
>ancap
Physical removal is right wing authoritarianism, brainlet.

>>14596291
Yeah, sure, that's why you're crying for gibsmedats for white people. Probably a bernie voter. Remember: no refunds!

>>14596298
Don’t expect ancaps to actually know political philosophy. They’re too busy jacking off to VR porn and fantasizing about being a billionaire capitalist

>>14595471
It's getting to the point where a sharia takeover might be alright. Christianity has been too weak lately. Hard-line religiosity is about the only good thing about the mud immigrants and it's the main thing being subverted baka.

>>14596305
Cringe

faggy trancaps are soooo edgy

Honkers will genocide them all, join the Honkhonkler.com community, get your HOURLY free bitcoin UBI

HONK HONK!!!
>t.clownworld

>>14596329
Cope poorfaggot

>Lol don't you realize that the economy will only work if the job-creators are exempt from all taxes and labor laws?
>HELP ME PUBLIC SECTOR I NEED MORE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS AND SUBSIDIES AND TARIFFS OR ELSE THE JAPANESE ARE GONNA PUSH MY COMPANY OUT OF BUSINESS!

Also Ancaps are basically Nazis. Nazis privatized almost their entire economy.

>>14596337
t. 50k income larping as a billionaire

Ancap is reheated feudalism for basement dwelling manchildren

>>14596347
t. Mystery mear American arping as aryan (aka 95% of /pol/)

>>14596362
ok Juan

>>14595439
... which is why ancap is better...

>>14596359
>Ancap is reheated feudalism
And that's a good thing!

>>14596359

>>14596382
And I’m sure in your mind you’ll be one of the lords and not one of the serfs

>>14596406
t. Asshurt december 2017 buyer nucoiner

>>14596179
>implying ancaps support any politician

>>14596431
Cope ancap faggot you just got rekt

Go back to your loli porn

>>14596445
I know you're a nucoiner because if you were here before 2017 you wouldn't be crying about rich people. Cope.

Judging by the commie level IQ ITT I now know why garbage like vidt and other Dutch scam projects are being shilled here

>>14596464
>he’s still pretending he’s rich on the internet

>>14596484
>projecting

>>14596508
I don’t recall ever talking about my wealth on this Mongolian basket weaving forum

>>14596157
Utopia

>>14596473
unironical question tho, what's up with VIDT? i've seen people just shilling it but also FUDding it yet it keeps going up

>>14596523
You sound poor

>>14595832
this
>>14596005
muh ancap is kewl, guns and no taxes

ancap and natbol are the cousin eating his boogers in the family picture of political doctrines, there's left and right and center, and then there's absolute retardation

>ancap memes
ancap is a meme

>>14596571
>projecting

>>14596339
>Nazis privatized almost their entire economy
What a cuck. How much are you paid to lie on an imageboard?

Ancap works in a genetically and culturally homogeneous society that is economically independent from the rest of the world (and has some sort of military deterrent such as a fat stack of nukes).
Hell, even straight up communism would work under these conditions, to a point.
The hard part is getting to that starting point.
Hence, populist movements giving way to truly fascist leadership structure, until the cleansing is complete and societal reorganisation is possible.
Then you can have your ancap or whatever for more than a generation.
Degenerates.

>>14595283
Ancap is based however you can't have true ancap without gooberment and eventually megacorps will form the government.

Also you can't have freedom without order and a secure border. So NatSoc is the only way that works

>>14596582
They did not privatize their economy but some of it was privatized. Hitler hated bolshevism. The only semi based communism was Stalin (communism under one nation) but even that was still kind of gay compared to NatSoc

>>14596582
>thinking shills are paid to come to this shithole
If anything people should be paid for staying away from this place.

>The first mass privatization of state property occurred in National Socialist Germany between 1933-37: "It is a fact that the government of the National Socialist Party sold off public ownership in several state-owned firms in the middle of the 1930s. The firms belonged to a wide range of sectors: steel, mining, banking, local public utilities, shipyard, ship-lines, railways, etc. In addition to this, delivery of some public services produced by public administrations prior to the 1930s, especially social services and services related to work, was transferred to the private sector, mainly to several organizations within the Nazi Party."[11]

>>14595376
>you can't have an ancap society while not being an ancap society
mind blown

>>14596663
That's not true, corporations are government constructs with special rights and protections. Kowloon Walled City had virtually no government and a thriving business sector made up entirely of small, independent businesses

>>14597135
The pure notions of Pubic and Private property (nationalisation and privatisation) make even less sense within Nazi Germany than it does in application to industries in the modern times.

They were denationalised de jure; but that doesn't make them de facto participants in the market. One of the most prominent ideas of Naziism was all working in unison and with one goal. Industry was not exempt. It was 'given back' to 'the people', yet ultimately it had to obey the boot of the party. Prices were set, production levels were set, staffing was set, location and rent were set, production quality was set. This isn't private. It's just not fully nationalised.

ancaps are autistic utopians just like commies

>>14597183
Distinction without a difference. The United States has operated by the economic model of government coordination of corporations/unions so that it could meet national goals since the Great Depression. Doesn't mean that these privately owned companies are in the "hands of the people" or aren't competing.

Most titans of industry may flaunt their Ayn Rand books but would never in a million years desire a fully "free market" system without a large state sector assisting the survival of their businesses through subsidies, government contracts, use of government services, and tariffs to protect their products from foreign competitors. The whole history of the 1980s was the private sector decrying government overreach while at the same time demanding new tariffs to protect the American market from superior Japanese goods while demanding the government fund retraining of the American private sector so that it could compete on the equal playing field of the "free market".

Also lol @ privatization is handing back industries to "the people".

>>14595306
>child slaves

What, are they just not going to grow up anon?

cypherpunk is the evolution of libertarianism
while ancaps dream about no government the cypherpunk codes the DAO that will replace a kike's insurance company with a fucking smart contract that executes by itself and it's immutable

if you're not a cypherpunk you're in the losing team

>>14597276
I didn't claim anything about industry being returned to the people in seriousness. These were the claims of Nazi Germany. I am not a Nazi, nor do I believe that these things were actually given to 'the people'.

I don't disagree with you on any level other than that the distinction is without a difference.

There are degrees to which property is private or otherwise. A company which receives 1% of its revenue through subsidy is more private than one which receives 100% through subsidy. A firm which chooses who to hire without coercion is more private than one which has to hire certain demographics. The degree to which a person must utilize 'his' property for certain purposes in order to avoid state punishment is the degree to which it is not private.

Though if our disagreement ultimately boils down to the idea that all property is theft and can only exist hand-in-hand with the state and is therefore all, in absolute equity, state property (or property through unjust coercion), then there's no point in really arguing the point. We won't agree with one another.

/biz/ is a spook free board.

>>14595283
Maybe keep some natsoc so somebody can build and take care of the roads

>>14596325
>Changing from one jewish scam to the next
No thanks

>>14595283
>non-aggression
>physical removal
Based image

>>14597677
What are you implying is a Jewish scam? Christianity is not although the Jews have worked hard to subvert it as much as possible.
Jews import muds to the west as proxy warriors to destroy whites but the fact remains that Islam is anti Jew and it's effectiveness can be seen in places like Iran where they rid themselves of kikes which the Jews are still seething about.

http://www.unz.com/pub/jhr__iran-some-angles-on-the-islamic-revolution/

>>14597267
I've never heard ancap talk about utopia. In fact, they usually look forward to useless leeches starving to death or getting shot by an automatic turret whilst trying to steal.

What happens when a 12 yr old girl wants to take money from an old guy wanting to suck his dick in this ancap society?

>>14597983
Depends on the local law. In Singapore it is illegal to chew bubblegum - that is perfectly compatible with ancap as long as nobody is forcing you to be there.

>>14598023
What law?

>>14597945
That’s their idea of a utopia

>>14598023
So you’re saying authoritarian governments are ancap as long as the people can voluntarily leave? Very strange idea. You’re never going to have a world where you can move freely from country to country. Most people are stuck in the country in which they were born and I don’t see how you’ll change that

>>14598048
Law established by local stakeholders. Anarchism != no rules. It means there are no rulers. If you can't comprehend how could that possible be, you should probably study how Bitcoin works.

>>14598123
Most friction today in terms of moving elsewhere is being able to take your property with you without incurring huge costs and risks. Bitcoin solves that, because now you can take your value with you by memorizing 12 words.

Regarding where you can go, depends on the state. If you have thousands of city-states and jurisdictions, some of them will gladly let you in for a fee. Such jurisdictions already exist today.

>>14598123
Basically the idea is based off the same principle that supermarkets use to throw you ought if you start masturbating in their aisles.
Ownership rights over areas, roads, public spaces, etc, would develop into quite universal/widespread norms and become quite similar to what we consider public law.

>>14598135
So essentially there will be jewish and muslim localities where you can fuck kids. Sounds terrible desu

>>14598227
no worse than Britain then

>>14595283
These people, ancaps, natsocs, commies, I tell you, they're not right in the head. Keep away kids, and remember, buy low sell high.

>>14598227
That's right. Keep in mind that there are probably thousands of children sucking on 60 yo cocks as you read this, in Brazil, Africa, middle east etc. Of course it is illegal over there, but nobody cares because of corruption.

In a hypothetical ancap world, you could incentivize jurisdictions to not tolerate that by refusing to do any business with them, unless they have laws protecting minors. Does that mean there won't be shitholes where you can abuse kids? Of course not. Those will always exist, just like today. Just keep your kids out of there and worry about your life.

Ancapism is some really strange form of turbocharged feudalism with neoliberal attitudes towards the markets.

>>14595413
Who do you think thought of the premise that our welfare should be opened up to the whole world, which has now been memed into a basic tenet of society?

>>14598356
>and that's a good thing

>>14598223
I don’t see how this differs from what we already have right now

>>14598898
We don't live in a society built upon natural distribution of resources according to property rights, and almost everyone permits the violation of property rights through the state.
The state is, for an ancap, an illegitimate owner of property, and routinely expands its coercive and parasitical powers.

>>14598942
Didn’t you just say Singapore’s law prohibiting chewing bubble gum is fine? I’m not following

>>14598967
That wasn't me.
I presume, though, that what that person meant (if he is actually an ancap) is that rules prohibiting chewing bubblegum on private property are absolutely fine, rather than that it's fine when the Singaporean state makes public law of similar content.

>>14598981
Why is the state not a legitimate owner of property?

>>14598999
Because the notion of property is that the owner can do with it what he wishes provided that he does not infringe upon another's selfsame right.
Modern history (250 yrs) is a history of coercive centralization, and before that one of conquest

Even if the state did hold its land, it doesn't abide by its own "contracts" (as it is its own judge); so you have the "agreed" rights of those living on the land overturned without restitution.

Private example: if I rent a house out to someone and agree that I can't kick them out until next year, then evict them one week after, I have coerced them, even though they're on "my" property (to which they, through the agreement, actually have rights).

The state has been able to continuously violate these "lease agreements" (again, if you consider a nation the just land of the state - I do not) and this has led us to our current position. The U.S. is the most clear-cut example of this violation - income taxes foremost, land seizures too.

>>14599071
You are the property of the state though, so why can’t it do with you as it pleases

>>14599113
>You are the property of the state though
People are necessarily their own property and they cannot give themselves away (as giving oneself away is a deed which presents an ontological impossibility)

Even if that weren't the case, though, when do you think that the state started to justly own me?

>>14599140
>People are necessarily their own property
Why?

>when do you think that the state started to justly own me?
The moment you acquired citizenship, so birth

>>14599164
>as giving oneself away is a deed which presents an ontological impossibility

>The moment you acquired citizenship, so birth
that's not a contract I was part of; you're also presupposing that I was my own property before birth in order for this to be a valid transfer regardless (which it is not)

>>14598981
I wrote that and you are right. To expand on the previous post, the entity of 'jurisdiction of Singapore' can itself be a private property owned by shareholders. I do not think the concept of 'public property' makes sense, because the incentives are not aligned. The clerks managing such property and the 'public' voting them in have no skin in the game.

>>14599180
>giving oneself away is a deed which presents an ontological impossibility
Why? And how does this prove that the state can’t own people?

>that's not a contract I was part of
So?

>you're also presupposing that I was my own property before birth
No I didn’t

>>14595283
Go back to somalia.

>>14599164
State cannot own people since it is a violation of their inherent human rights (religious people would say God-given rights). If you would attempt to impose such idea onto someone through violence or coercion, that person has the right to defend themselves. If you disagree with that you are a collectivist totalitarian, no different from communists and fascists.

>>14599228
The very admittance of ownership implies owner. Owner is the exact same thing as subject, as being, as self-conscious entity.
One cannot give oneself away because in every single action which one takes, one presupposes one's right to act.
The idea that the state owns you means that you could not act without its permission; yet the understanding and processing of this permission requires your own value judgements - that is, requires action. So the claim is necessarily contradictory.
The subject, the owner, is a receptacle for property, not property. They are entirely different classes of existence, as are subject and object. The subject is not an object.

You cannot respond to me without admitting that your ethical position does not apply. You own yourself.

Additionally, let us say that you get transferred to 'the state' as property. To whom are you actually transferred? Another citizen? Why, then, do they have ownership over themselves? If not, then to who are you transferred? To nobody? Then you reassert yourself.

>>14599310
Very nice explanation, lets see if he wants to understand it.

>>14599306
>it is a violation of their inherent human rights

Prove these exist

>If you disagree with that you are a collectivist totalitarian, no different from communists and fascists.

Correct, I am a fascist

>>14599310

>The idea that the state owns you means that you could not act without its permission; yet the understanding and processing of this permission requires your own value judgements - that is, requires action. So the claim is necessarily contradictory.

If I do something that the state deems illegal, it sends me to jail, illustrating its ownership over me. I don’t see the contradiction you’re claiming

>Additionally, let us say that you get transferred to 'the state' as property. To whom are you actually transferred? Another citizen? Why, then, do they have ownership over themselves? If not, then to who are you transferred? To nobody? Then you reassert yourself.

You are correct that the state can be difficult to define in plain terms, but that does not mean it does not exist. In some cases the state can be defined as the property of a single person (eg monarchy, which I support) but in other cases it becomes a bit more nebulous to define

anybody who is an ancap has never had a job

>>14599383
We're not talking about what it does, we're talking about what is ought to do.
Of course you can be coerced - this I do not deny. I deny that it is ethical.
Since you appear to support a monarchy, and that the monarchy then has ownership rights over its people, do we prove that the monarch never, in fact, had such rights in the first place as a result of being slain and conquered by a foreign monarch? If so, then you cannot believe in the rights of a monarch. If not, then you must apply this to man as man.

>You are correct that the state can be difficult to define...
From where did the monarch's rights originate?
Can a monarch be justly stripped of his property by his subjects without his consent?
Are monarchs ontologically different to subjects qua subjects?
If the monarch did not own himself at the point of inception of his being, how was property transferred unto him for his rule? Something which does not own itself cannot own others.

Bear in mind that the ancap perception of things is that the inevitable outcome of consistent application of property rights is the sole (or small group) ownership of areas from the size of towns to small provinces, wherein the just owners of this property set binding contracts (jointly binding, constitutional) to those who rent (or buy) land within the area and act very much like monarchs. We're not your enemy.

>>14599383
>>14599469
In /biz/ terms, anarcho-capitalism is chainlink fascism

>>14595283
Leftist Libertarian/ AnCom here.

I am not leaving. Statists btfo though.

>>14599469
I'm getting out of my depth here, but seems to me the only way he can be logically consistent whilst maintaining his position is to classify certain groups of humans as slaves based on their external properties like race, or economic class.
But that is in contradiction with their free will, if they decide to resist. Could you explain why animals can be a property?

>>14599632
I said it's based on subjecthood. This applies to animals also, and is the ultimate question of all ethics.
If animals are subjects with apperception and self-consciousness, then they are receptacles for property, of which their will is primary and body is the next immediate.
If they're not subjects, then they are objects, regardless of what their nerves tell them to do or what we project onto them. They are then just tables and chairs, ethically speaking.

One could maintain that certain humans are property if we strip them of subjecthood.

one time reminder that ANCAPISTAN® is a arg larp and we are all nazi faggots

>>14595283
Anarchies don't solve the issue which we have been attempting to solve since the inception of the human species: how can we have power over power? To do away with power implies that you have the power to do away with power, which is a contradiction. Therefore anarchies cannot exist. Power must always exist. So how do we "contain" that power in a way that prevents it from harming us and impels it to work for our benefit? If you think you have arrived at the answer, you have not. We have spent thousands of years trying to answer this question, and no perfect solution has been found (or if it has been found, it has never been implemented successfully). Accept that imperfect implementations of governance are all that can exist and work to make the systems we do have marginally less imperfect.

>>14599696
national socialism is fiat anarcho capitalism

>>14599674
If they are subjects, then I am violating NAP when I decide to cage a wild wolf, or hunt for a bison. However, that is inherent to nature and animals do that to each other as well.
I am like ancap, because it resonates with my values of what is fair. But I like to eat steak, so I decide animals are objects. It's hardly surprising that someone with a slightly different set of values arrives at a conclusion, that some humans ought to be objects using the same logic as me, when I am eating my steak.

This is why in the end these prescriptive debates of what ought to be are just a mental masturbation, because what manifests in reality is a result of the logic of violence, not a result of an ethics debate or a public vote. Defensive technologies decentralize power, offensive technologies centralize it. Bitcoin is skews the advantage back to defense and that is why the future will look more according to the ancap ideals instead fascist ideals. We do not have to win a prescriptive debate.

>being a lolbertardian in any year after 2008

Topkek. Fascism or bust.

>>14599961
I mostly agree.

Ultimately the granting of ethical-subject-status to other entities is entirely faith based and cultural. No political or ethical system ought to be planted onto a culture not fit nor ready for it (including anarcho-capitalism, despite my belief in it)

>>14595376
>t. Filthy renter who is too poor or stupid to already have privately owned land in the countryside with a fence around it
The real joke is that your kind were the niggers before the new ones showed up. The problems you mention don't actually bother an ancap that was already contingency planning against you.

>>14599704
This is a little bit of straw-man. Anarchy currently exists at the international level. You are imagining, that ancaps pre-scribe borderless and lawless planet Earth where everybody can do what they want without somehow killing each other. That is not the case.
Ancaps simply say, that all human interaction should be voluntary on both sides, and that you have inherent rights to life, property, free speech (but not a right to be listened to) and that you can defend those rights.

>>14595283
Ancaps are more dumb than leftists

>muh (((free market))) solves everything
Fascism is the only answer

/biz/ is a NatSoc board. everybody knows that.

when socially conscious nationalism?