Re: Anti-geoist Liars Never Learn...

On Feb 22, 2:18 pm, ro...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Habitual liar and feudal "libertarian" apologist for privilegePaulBirchhas once again foolishly tried to rescue his previous lies with
even more absurd lies, and has again been duly demolished for it:

http://www.libertarianunderground.com/Forum/index.php/topic,198.40.html

Better read it quick, beforeBirchagain uses his power as forum
moderator to delete all the refutations of his claims that he can't
think of any plausible-sounding lies to counter.

-- Roy L

I've responded to it.

In a colossal case of missing the point, Birch's entire argument seems
to rest on his assertion that since the total externality contributed
towards site value equals the total external value received, that the
collection of this economic rent via a tax on site value is unjust.
Nevermind the fact that the parties whose activities created the site
value are distinct from the parties who are appropriating that site
value. That's just a minor detail in his opinion, one that can be
safely ignored. ;-)

I have another thread going on with him in the "Minarchy" forum on
that site. He proposes a variation of what Nozick termed, "the
ultraminimal state" which is a predecessor to the "minimal state". In
Birch's variant, a dominant protection agency would establish a
monopoly of force over a given geography, but would allow
"independents" to live in that territory while opting-out of the
agency's protection racket. In effect, Birch wants a monarch who
would enforce property and contracts absolutely, but who gives his
subjects the option to opt-out of the scheme if they do not want to
pay protection money.

I have encountered this sort of nonsense enough times that I have come
up with a term for it - the benevolent despot fallacy. It goes
something like, "we need a dictator who will enforce some small set of
rules (property and contracts in this case) absolutely and completely,
but NOTHING more."
.