home36rown,
I apologize for not being able to vomit out a short answer here. This is the best I could do, and I would still consider it cliff notes.
The biggest problem with a stateless society is no taxes. You aren't going to get much revenue if 'taxes' are voluntary, Especially since a lot of rich people would probably hightail it the fuck outta here.
First off, because a tax is something which is levied, there can be no taxation in a stateless society. Apple doesn't have to tax you for their service. If you do not want to purchase an iphone, you can go to a competitor and purchase another phone with similar features. This purchase would be a voluntary transaction, not a tax.
It cost billions of dollars to pay for the infrastructure necessary for us to not be a complete hell hole. Are we really going to have enough money in your stateless society to buy tomahawk cruise missles and F-16s...and feed, clothe and arm a decent sized military...and yes we NEED these things to provide for our defense.
It cost hundreds of millions of dollars to develop the iphone, yet not a single tax was necessary for Apple to levy to bring this product to market. Taxes are not a necessary component to building and maintaining roads and a military (which in a stateless society would be MUCH smaller than our current legions of worldwide military might).
Do you think people in south central are going to pull enough money together voluntarily to hire a private police force? The Gangs would have a field day.
This is a great, thought provoking question. You first need to realize (which Im sure you already do) that the vast majority of community violence is brought about by governmental central planning and prohibition of drugs. The government essentially created the ghettos and gangs.
The next element to consider is the current status quo. Reading between the lines, you seem to presume that these "ghettos" are
currently being patrolled and protected properly by our current police system, though I'm sure you know there are some communities where the police just do not enter.
Examing the environment of a stateless society, you see several elements take shape when it comes to the protection of low income communities...
1. There will be no central planning, and no government welfare which creates more poverty than it prevents. No addiction to government subsidies. No subsidized housing, which gives impoversished renters little market choice for where they live.
2. No gang violence associated with drugs and prostitution which would have a legitimate place in the free market.
3. No taxation which allows an abundance of wealth that was wasted frivolously by the government, to be used to create more jobs and thus more prosperity. Blue collar workers take home 100% of their earnings without being subjected to withholdings.
4. All property is privately owned, thus the homes, apartments and condos that the "poor" are renting will have a privately contracted security company hired by the landlords to ensure the safety of their property and tenants. Because the landlords are accountable to their customers (tenants), they will be incentivized to provide a reasonable amount of security to the community. If they do not, their tenants will move elsewhere, to a community where the landlords do provide such security.
5. There is even more nuance than this, but I think this should get us on the same page with the rational behind low income security in a stateless society. Let me know if you'd like me to continue.
Are we going to have enough money to maintain prisons, because we certainly are going to need a lot fuckin more of them, especially when the all the former welfare recipients start to get hungry.
You are right in asserting that once welfare is cut off from the recipients, the results will be analogous to a drug addict in detox. This is a transitional factor that should be thought out and debated, but the answer is not to continue giving drugs to the addict.
Hypothetically, if prisons continued to be run similarly in a stateless society, you would see several trends including...
1. 50% less inmates just from the "legalization" of drugs, prostitution, and violations of drug related probation. Plus, a large percentage of less inmates from the violent criminal category as a byproduct of this legalization.
2. The replacement of prison sentences with civil penalties and ecomomic deterrents, which are proven far more effective than putting people behind bars, given our 80% reciticism rate. Prison is not an effective rehab. It's a revolving door. In a stateless society you would not want your social credit score effected to the point where you cannot enter into contracts with people, thus people are even more incentivized to not "break rules".
3. Again, I can continue if you want me to dig into this more deeply. This issue is much more nuanced, and I can explain why many prisons would hold people on voluntary sentences, as counter-intuitive as that sounds.
Who makes the laws in a stateless society? You anarchists/voluntaryists are always saying, well if they don't infringe upon the rights of others...
There will not be "laws" in the sense that the creators of these "laws" will hold a monopoly of force to impose these laws on society.
To participate productively in the free market (rent/buy a house, have a job, own a business, purchase a car, etc.) which over 99% of the population will want to do, you cannot live "off the grid". Now that government is not around, we will see businesses pop up that I'll call DRO's for the sake of argument (Dispute Resolution Organizations). These businesses operate much like insurance companies, and everyone who wants to participate in society will need to be covered at various affordable rates.
These insurance companies would cooperate through interoperability like we see in many industries today. This ensures a universalization of protection in accordance to the non-aggression principle (dont hurt people unless they are trying to hurt you - same assurance for property) which the majority of their customers would want guaranteed. If you hurt someone (speaking very simply here) and are found guilty, your DRO would penalize you with higher rates or more severe punishments in accordance to your agreement with them, depending on the severity of the crime.
so in your stateless society it is perfectly ok to fuck a corpse in front of a elementary school?
In a free society, one would be allowed to fuck a corpse anywhere where corpse fucking is allowed, or on one's own property. If the corpse you are fucking was taken from private property, you would be penalized by your DRO for trespassing on private property and theft. If the particular school you are corpse fucking in front of allows corpse fucking, then you would be allowed to fuck the corpse in front of the children. However, I doubt any school would permit you to do such a thing on their property. I also doubt the company who owns the road you might be standing on has bylaws permitting corpse fucking.
Ahh I can see it now, the super rich own the police, they own the judges, they own the jails...they basically have unlimited power. Get in their way, and their police force will arrest you, their judges will convict you, and their jails will lock you in the hole and throw away the key.
By super rich, you might be referring to successful entrepreneurs and capital investors. Yes, these people would most likely own the security companies and DRO's. However, just like every company today, they are accountable directly to their customers. If they screw their customers or become corrupt, no one will do business with them and the business will collapse. Don't confuse corporatism and corporate predation with real business. The former is only possible when government and big business collide.
