On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 06:34:58PM -0600, Mirimir wrote: > On 08/28/2016 05:52 PM, jim bell wrote: > > Heroin is illegal, right? Fentanyl is illegal too, right? See the > > pattern?It takes the existence of regulation to allow much of this > > problem.Virtually all of the danger of Fentanyl is that people don't > > know what quality/concentration is in the sample they just bought > > illegally. Make itlegal, and the cost is very low, and quality > > could be easily assured. > > Maybe high prices are part of it. But someone needs to test stuff. > Without required testing, people get poisoned.
"required" here implies "government mandated" how about "individuals soon learn about testing, testing becomes inexpensive, and "purity" becomes part of trust reputation"? > > .> Or assholes spiking their dried > > milk with melamine, to boost apparent protein content. Etc etc etc. > > Not very common. And you can't argue that China had a lack of > > regulation.What China DID have was massive corruption, which you can > > get whenregulation is not uniformly consistent. Is there ANY example of 'democratic' or 'communistic' regulation, which does not devolve into corruption? Regulation implies the right to coerce. Coercion, and acceptance of coercion, is THE fundamental problem with all government today. When we justify coercion, and the right to coerce "for the good of the poor helpless sheeple" we participate in the creation of instant sociopath magnets. Sociopaths are drawn to the "accepted and just right" to coerce others. So, any government built on the right to coerce will, by its very nature, attract sociopaths. The world today seems to provide endless examples of this dynamic in action, and probably zero examples to the contrary! The good part of "anarchist" email list is that it is about teaching what anarchism actually is and shooting down bullshit in the guise of "some humans know better than other humans, and can therefore 'protect' those sheeple in the first group". I DON'T WANT YOUR DAMN PROTECTION! HOW MANY TIMES MUST THIS BE SAID IN A SO-CALLED 'ANARCHIST' GROUP? Humans not only have a right to make mistakes, we are denying a fundamental part of our nature when we try to "remove the problems from stupid people". How the hell will we ever develop strong, competant, self sufficient and self responsible humans, if we are not allowed to make our own mistakes, and are instead forced to accept the 'protection' of 'more capable' other humans? > China does not have effective regulation of food. Too much corruption. > > >> I suppose that AP could handle that. But many customers will get fucked > >> up before bids get high enough to take out sellers. Or we could have > >> private enforcement handle regulation. Regulation as a service ;) > > It will happen! Jim Bell > > So how exactly is private regulation better? How is limited government > to protect public interest that different from private enforcement? You > could have competing governments ;)
