If only communism could function under voluntarism.

I mean… Successfully privatizing reusable rocketry and making domestic launches possible in the states again is amazing even if you hate him.

Odd to me that you equate productivity with the value of a person.

Wouldn’t that be to trade for imports? Because their currencies aren’t accepted ?

The reasons for farm subsidies are… Debatable. If you keep food cheap people don’t notice currency debasement as much. Personally I think it might make more sense for prices to rise to a point where farmers are profitable without subsidies. Those subsidies are value extracted from the tax payer anyway… You’re paying for it.

You’re right too in that buses and trains are a lot cheaper and should always out compete cars. How much do you think fares would have to rise to make public transport self sufficient ? Make it so it funds its own expansion and service improvement.

The Toronto Transport Commission is my local example. From what I can napkin math they get about 1 billion dollars in subsidies per year from the city (maybe some provincial and fed money too… I rounded up generously). They collect a little over 700k fares a day. Wouldn’t take much of an increase with like almost 250 million fares a year to close that gap.

Privatize the roads and have cars users pay their share of that infrastructure cost and get the burden off of working people and I bet a small share increase would be pretty affordable.

Like you say avoiding liability is in everyone’s interest. In a utopian libertarian society maybe an inspector someone you’d want to pay electively like an engineer.

Someone who could coordinate consultations with surrounding properties and engage others who are experts with say surface water etc.

The other option might be your insurance company would require inspection for you to receive coverage… In the event of say an HVAC electrical fire. Then the cost is certifying the build is covered by a private company instead of being a state operated service which is free from the pressures of competition. Also then delays in permitting could also incur liability :)

In reality if permitting is quick, affordable and isn’t weilded like a political weapon Im mostly fine with it. The federal government is using it to pretty much shut down oil and gas development in Canada. Municipal permitting is partly why we have a massive housing crisis.

If you rented or bought a house close to a grocery store you’d mostly be able to do it. European cities were built when horse and carriage were still the best option. I think if city centres were designed to be car free and have everything organised to be walkable that’d be great for people who want that… There are certainly a lot of situations where someone needs to have a car … Here and in Europe.

A world where roads and public transit are all operated as for profit ventures without any tax ? Man now you’re talking … I’d love that

Where I live approval on average takes a year or more. Permits alone can cost like 50k for a house. All of those things you’ve mentioned would result in court cases and awards …

Honestly even residential houses that are to code are sort of trash aren’t they? Like laminated wood chips and saw dust more and more every year.

How many other approvals are required above you to build? How long and at what cost ? Mostly curious. Here its pretty bad IMO. Here being Canada.

I like her stance on economics and free markets … Also the prime mover concept is somewhat accurate

Yeah pipelines cause harm … But moving petroleum freight and truck is better? I have a pipeline across my property… After construction its just a cleared path essentially. There’s the risk of a spill of course but look at some of the rail disasters or oil tanker incidents … The oil and gas are being moved for you and me … we all use it and if love alternatives that work but we aren’t there yet.

I’m not sure how we got turned around on removing zoning restrictions … I agree that’s helpful. Yes the invisible hand of the market … What’s the first word there? Look at all of the products you enjoy… How they came to be… People in the west are so lucky and have it so good and all they do is complain.

Anyway let’s agree to disagree. When people power starts actually providing food electricity and transportation I’ll see it as working …

1.9% for people to go back to crossing the Atlantic on the titanic … No more air freight. No more sunny vacations for anyone. That’s all aviation gone. Now you find me the other 50% on that pie chart and picture the miserable world you’re advocating for. Then realise no logical developing country is going to comply with that plan as that means freezing them at their current level and that this isn’t a fixable problem through reductions … And chasing several thousand high emissions worth individuals is an utter waste of time … Let’s just agree to disagree I suppose.

Their*

Some environmental impact is unavoidable. I think people are maybe a bit more aware and if I knew a company was being unnecessarily wreckless I’d personally not give them a dime. Also this is what lawsuits are for. These companies should be sued into nonexistence.

Why are domestic companies forced to compete on an uneven playing field like that? Why are companies able to just go abroad and import at very favourable rates. That’s profoundly unfair … But have you thought about what would happen to the cost of goods if there was an equal playing field? All the worst things are still done they just happen elsewhere.

Yeah… I’m not a fan of that either personally.

Yes the BBC article is correct too. Just because CO2 emissions per km travelled are high doesn’t mean they’re statistically relevant in terms of total emissions. All aviation at 1.9% is basically not a meaningful amount of CO2 if you need a 50% reduction.

When weighted for KMs travelled a riding lawn mower is probably worse than a private jet by that logic.

Some people are just better in terms of being productive. I don’t see how that’s debatable. The question is just if you let those people keep they’re outsized earnings or you forcibly redistribute them.

Me too

Yeah I just- put that in another comment. Made a funny crack about privatising roads to incorporate the true cost of infrastructure with tolls lol. Might incentivize more people to use transit.

I guess the difference being the people in control of permits and policies produce nothing of value. If a capitalist fails to produce he no longer holds the property or patents. Someone else gets them to try to compete.

The reason capitalism is moral is that the people who get the scarce resources need to be effective in providing for everyone else by creating or they lose them. Under a central planning system this is not the case. Scarce resources are held by connected people … The state bails them out if they really fuck up.

Nothing is stopping you from creating an improved Gillette razor and competing without blatenly copying their patent… Property is expensive but available (problem created by government with interest rate manipulation and making land one of the only viable hard assets) you can hire people for your factory. They’ll cost 10x what they do overseas though… So you’d probably just go there.

Man you won’t find me defending fractional reserve banking or fiat currency. Those are also things created by politicians and bankers. They’re just means of stealing value. You also can’t have socialism without fiat currency. The myth that you can rob the 1% to pay for the needs of everyone… Well do the math … Liquidate the 10 richest people and it funds the state for maybe a month or something.

Ah I didn’t get the joke I guess lol. I’m not really much of a fan of socialism. If companies can’t build without permits and tax breaks then you dont really have a level playing field anymore and you no longer have functional creative destruction. Old inefficient well connected incombants strangle the new razor corp in the crib and you’re stuck paying 35 dollars for blades :)