Victoribus Spolia wrote:You have yet to substantiate this claim.
I mentioned the fact of US colonial history, and how this created the system of land ownership from which you currently benefit.
How would an answer to this question demonstrate that land ownership must necessarily cease in the absence of a state, as you have claimed (though you made the opposite claim regarding Indians?
This seems irrelevant.
In any event, you have failed to answer my question:
if a state ceased to exist; that doesn't necessarily mean ownership of land would cease then, according to your argument. Is that correct? Yes or No?
So you cannot give an example of land ownership staying the same after the state failed.
Meanwhile, the history of indigenous people shows that their land claims were ignored, dismissed, no longer recognized, whatever, after colonialism.
When I said this;
That does not supoort your claim that monopolies can only exist with state support.
You claim that there is no logical argument; I have one posted in a thread specifically dedicated to this purpose. You have just refused to debate me on it for the SEVENTH TIME!
It doesn't look like i'm the one who is dodging, given that fact.
I demostrated such via logical argument and have challenged you to debate it. You have refused. I believe the argument as its valid and apparently irrefutable
Again, the fact that you refuse to provide an argument is a dodge.
The fact that you claim some other argument might be related is inconsequential.
Another absolute statement.
Please provide evidence for this claim.
Capitalism has never existed without a state.
You are free to provide a contrary example that would disprove this.
Can regulations increase costs for businesses? Yes or No?
Can regulations increase the capital needed to start a business? Yes or No?
Can regulations increase the amount of time a businessman spends on government compliance and does this take away time he could otherwise spend on serving customers? Yes or No?
If these questions lead to an argument, please make it.
Now, we have already seen how regulations can decrease costs and increase customers.
One of the costs for running a business is insurance. Complying with all applicable regulations in terms of safety can greatly reduce these costs, since the business is already operating at a verifiably safer level than one that is not covered by regulations.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...