Just go right ahead and ignore all my previous comments of how Anarcho-caps have a more nuanced view of Land property rights than you are leading on.


This is a hint that you don't understand arguments made by Anarcho-caps/Voluntarism. You have made several accusations that we lack compassion and are only concerned with payment/profits. You are thinking too simplistic and making a false dichotomy as anarchists claim that charity through violent coercion makes society unhealthier and thus harms everyone, but especially the middle class and poor.(There are many detailed reasons for this).

I don't view you as a 2 dimensional Socialist/Communist who is a lazy pot smoking welfare recipient who greedily wants to steal from the rich, I do genuinely believe you think that your politics will enrich not only yourself but society as a whole and I understand the reasons why you think so. I can see that you don't afford the same level of respect to attempt to understand the details of our position, right?


I have already addressed how these could be provided in an anarcho-cap or collectivist society without violence or coercion. The problem with my proposition is while providing increased liberty, flexibility and more consistent ethics it does pose potential instability in a specific community. One would expect greater inflow and outflow of residents if they changed their mind or were unhappy with their community standards in social services. There could be a risk of a sudden mass exodus if corruption sinks in the community. These are fair tradeoffs to make IMHO.



Well, that is one great thing about Bitcoin, It certainly has a big tent of proponents from every motivation and background.