Would You Pay $300,000 to Become a Citizen of This Proposed Free-Market Utopia…in Detroit? | TheBlaze.com
theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/28/would-you-pay...
theblaze.comPosted Jan 29, 2013, 7:29 PM UTC
4586
theblaze.comIf citizenship exists, it does not value the free market. A free market allows owners of property to sell that property to anyone they please. Citizenship is only relevant when governments start battling over turfs and serfs.
19
Well technically it's perfectly compatible with anarcho-capitalism as membership (or citizenship, as they refer to it) is entirely voluntary and payment agreements (taxes) are made in advance.
6
Sure, it's compatible with anarcho-capitalism. Just as a land owner selling land only to those willing to cooperate in his communist community would be voluntary and compatible with anarcho-capitalism.
But neither should market itself as a "Free-Market Utopia" because they both demonstrate that they do not value the free market.
No one who emigrates to this land will ever be a full owner of their land will ever be a full owner of their property because they do not have the right to sell it to whomever they please.
3
Citizenship is only relevant when governments start battling over turfs and serfs.
Best line of the week.
3
Fuck that. Why should rich people get to escape and while the rest of us go down with the ship?
No, I shall imitate the crab and drag those bastards down with me. Better the crab than the rat fleeing a sinking ship.
-9
They didn't put you in the situation you are in. In reality, you should be mad at the state.
8
you should be mad at the state
Who work very hard with corporations(read rich influential people) to screw everybody over.
1
Oh I'm terribly mad at the state. It just doesn't do me any particular good that a rich group of rats want to flee with their loot so fuck them.
1
What, are you jealous that they're trying to escape and you're not?
2
If you had the money, would you flee or stay?
1
You know one of the things you cappies never understand is that in order for some to have such extravagant wealth others must go without. Now after a few generations that leaves some folks out in the cold while it leaves others jetting off to Paris for lunch.
That aint right. And no fucking rhetoric or bullshit you could say will change that. Not ever.
0
The zero sum fallacy .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYyNY_5ACFc
People can create wealth, there isn't a fixed amount of wealth that gets depleted whenever someone makes or produces something.
2
If you're going to downvote a legitimate response to your comment at least explain to me why that's wrong.
0
[deleted]
1
Wouldn't this area in Detroit still fall under Federal laws?
10
It's an island in the middle of a river between Canada and the U.S. Maybe they could figure out some way to skirt around federal laws? Not sure how that would work, but I guess it's possible.
5
If that was the case, then this place would be like a super charged Singapore in our backyard.
13
Sounds like fun to me.
7
Hong Kong might be a better analogy.
1
Because oppressive government regulations over personal freedoms are the ancap way? Hong Kong may turn a blind eye to some capital ventures, but don't be fooled that the Chinese government isn't looking over their shoulders.
3
$300k to buy property? Sure. $300k as a tax to live somewhere? No thanks.
10
Won't happen. The local "leadership" doesn't even want the state to take over management of the park:
They'll never lease it to a bunch of capitalists.
9
like the US would ever allow any of its territory to secede, even from just a state to a territory?
it doesn't sound like a bad idea, I just don't see it happening.
8
Glen Beck's Blaze -- your go to place for libertarian news!
6
So how often has Blaze been linked on this subreddit? Does the discussion of this article at all warrant criticism? Does the fact that Beck owns Blaze mean that the article can be rejected without further inspection?
What are your thoughts on the article?
13
Sounds like they plan to use what sounds to be a Georgist "single tax". Sounds interesting. It's an experiment that bears watching.
Glenn Beck clearly is moving in a libertarian direction. That's where opportunity lies. Whether you want your belief system associated with him is a question you (collectively) need to answer.
7
I totally agree. I'm wary of Beck's move, but maybe the promotion of at least semi-decent libertarianism is in his best interests. Perhaps, he'll do some good even if his motives are opportunistic.
4
Most of the people I talk to outside of my closest friends already think I'm a nutjob when I say I'm libertarian. For myself, Glenn Beck moving in is the exact opposite of helping the movement.
2
Yes, we must all have the same opinion or our belief system is invalid.
1
Totally agree with you. Anyone who's a real libertarian or more importantly, an ancap, is not going to get here by way of Glenn Beck. He will bring the moronic tea-partiers and other dipshits from the republican party and turn our movement into a joke.
"Take your filthy government hands off of my medicare." signs will continue to be waved.
5
I don't know about tea party or other dipshits, but I'm socially conservative and - I'm getting there slowly - finding myself drawn to the ancap philosophy.
So far, I don't see an incompatibility between my morals and anarccho capitalism.
3
Well welcome aboard, but I assure you that you are an anomaly. I'm curious - how can you be socially conservative yet cool with the ideas of letting people do whatever they want? Don't social conservatives want to force everyone to be like them?
1
You can be socially conservative, and not want to force others to have the same values. It's a truly radical idea.
5
how can you be socially conservative yet cool with the ideas of letting people do whatever they want?
I don't see a contradiction.
I'm converting to Catholicism. I drink in moderation, have never done illegal drugs. And so on.
But I don't believe anyone should be forced to abide by my ethos or morality except as they choose.
Don't get me wrong - I think it's good for you, and your immortal soul.
But I'm not pushy about it.
Don't social conservatives want to force everyone to be like them?
This one doesn't. What a boring world that would be.
3
How is this supposed to be a utopia of the free market when it costs $300,000 to even get in?
I'm guessing they won't have any free market hot dog vendors, pizza delivery, janitors, etc. In fact who there is going to do any work? It's going to be a rich person's resort.
Nobody who has $300,000 to drop on moving there is going there with the aspiration of being a carpenter, taxi driver, window washer, etc.
3
To start with, yes, I suppose those who trailblaze will be enjoying a rich man's resort. Later on, they'll have to import laborers at least to be menial servants and the like. For now, they'll probably concentrate on building homes and maybe offices for executives and other bigwigs. Even if they always make the requirement for permanent residence a $300,000, I wouldn't mind the equivalent of a work visa just to work there for a few months or years if the wages are sufficiently appealing.
1
"20 percent of citizenships would be open for striving immigrants, starving artists and up-and-coming entrepreneurs who don’t meet the financial requirement."
1
You forgot to mention (probably) fiat currency issues and (probably) statutory law issues. This entire "project" misses the point and runs under the neocon meme of thinking if the supply side is allow to do anything then magic will happen.
1
Sounds more like Galt's Gulch.
1
Free-Market Utopia…in Detroit?
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHA
2
300k seems pretty steep.
1
-
I assume a payment scheme could be worked out.
-
It will never happen.
But sure, I'd do it. Something like this could be like Hong Kong was for mainland China. Getting in on the ground floor of a deal like that would be a super opportunity.
1
I don't think citizenship is really a "ground floor" kind of thing. If anything, I would expect the price to go down once the initial investment has been paid off and they start to make a profit.
2
Citizenship isn't, but the opportunities are.
1
and what will they do when the US military pulls up?
1
Elon Musk thinks he can get me to Mars for 500K. I think I will save up and move to a stateless society beyond the reach of the US government and other world governments.
1
Hey I live in Detroit!
Aww... I don't have $300k to pay. I guess I'll wait for the overflow of anarchism.
1
If I had $300,000 then I wouldn't need to live in a free market utopia. I would be just fine in the regular US. "Freemarket utopias" seem a lot more relevant to me for people trying to come up in the world and make their fortune. If you are already well off you got nothing to bitch about.
Try living in the world of not being able to get your kids the medical attention they need because all you can afford is medicaid which is practically fucking useless. Try living in a world where your total allotment of food stamps is adjusted each month based on your income so that you never have enough money to live on or get ahead. You try that and suddenly a freemarket utopia doesn't seem so bad. Well only if you are given some means of production at the beginning to make your way.
But to pay in such an extreme amount of money? Or having to work for somebody in a place where there are no protections for labor? No thanks.
-1
Protections for labor? I labor in the U.S. and I don't feel very protected. In fact, I feel downright shit on by the government. I make slightly more than poverty wages and they take one of every five dollars I make. If I had 20% more wealth, I'd protect my own damn self.
1
Oh I'm not saying that our state is awesome and the labor protections it provides are amazing and what I would want. But just by way of example my former colleagues and I worked for a decade in a basement with very poor air quality, mold, dead critters and the occasional flood. Ten fucking years our managers did nothing about this while people who worked there got sicker and sicker. They actually bitched at us for being so sickly from their nice third floor offices with windows.
Well it literally only took one anonymous phone call to OSHA that precipitated an air quality inspection and suddenly our bosses couldn't remodel that basement fast enough. We got all new furniture, flooring, two big ass air purifiers and actual real ventilation installed. The building was also inspected and some of the obvious entryways for rats and whatever else (one co-worker didn't realize she had a bat hanging from her ceiling for hours one day) were blocked off.
So yeah I get it. Our pay isn't fair and the lower level you work at the worse you are paid and the more work is expected from you. But in an anarcho-capitalist "utopia" my former colleagues and I would still be working in that shit basement and I highly doubt our pay would have been any better.
1
Ten fucking years our managers did nothing about this while people who worked there got sicker and sicker. They actually bitched at us for being so sickly from their nice third floor offices with windows.
Employment is free at will in the US. Why didn't you guys just quit if you didn't approve of the working conditions? How is coercion justifiable in this instance?
1
Because the job market sucks. Getting new jobs isn't easy and that itself is a coercive force.
1
[deleted]