u/Few_Needleworker8744

Think about it.

Under full libertarianism, your salary will be the same with 3rd world salary. If your salary is higher, then those 3rd world will come and replace you.

And I am talking about "moderate" libertarians where only productive 3rd world people come. In extreme open border. libertarianism, all people can come to your country. They can eventually vote for even more socialism or wreak havoc. Just look at Europe.

Of course some of us will make even more money. But majority most likely will earn less? Are you okay with that?

What about monogamy?

Under full libertarianism, dude like Elon can have 1k-1million children. Just offer money.

I personally have no issue with this. But many people do. Many people here do.

They like monogamy, for example. To me monogamy is socialism.

Some people would say that Elon couldn't possibly attract thousands of women. Wrong. Look at the chicks he is knocking up. That's the kind of chicks he can get consensually. Monogamy won't survive libertarianism. In Tinder and everything a few top dude get all.

You see women like money a lot like men like young beautiful women. Beautiful women can attract infinite number of men. Sure she has capacity. She can't be knocked up by all. But there isn't really limit for "attraction". Onlyfans show that beautiful women are racking a lot.

Some people here argues that the child is the victim because the child doesn't consent. Seriously. A child born with superior IQ and huge inheritance is a "victim". What's next? They're also privileged?

In consistent libertarianism, women getting paid to share some rich dude with harem will be very common.

And I haven't touched touchy issues like do people have right to be protected by government from violence or should they pay private cops. I am talking standard normal libertarian.

We all like free market in all but what's the limit?

Not to mention practicality. Like how exactly libertarian party can win election if full libertarianism means majority of people are just as better off as 3rd worlder? Even if we all like libertarianism we will be outvoted.

And don't like democracy? Well. Many libertarians do.

I think this is why I am closer to moldbugian than libertarian. But what do you think? What's your limit?

I think democracy is a form of formalism. It makes things more explicit disprovable and make things less of a mystery.

In general, all government, even monarchy got to care about what people want. They need soldiers. People move to better governed feudal lords.

However government obligation to the people is usually vague. Usually it's a lie that come with religion. Nobody can proof or disproof a dude is a good king or not. Different dudes think differently.

Some kings are doing well. Dubai, Monaco, Liechtenstein.

But till when?

China also had great emperors. Huang Lao emperors, Empress Lu, Wen Jing era and Ming Zheng, are quite libertarian.

But I wouldn't say democracy is wrong.

At least under democracy, there is something that we can all verify. Number of votes. Without that, we may resolves our differences with civil war again.

That being said, number of voters and approval rating is very far from scam proof.

So another step of formalism will simply turn voters into shareholders. Now everybody can verify if their share prices go up or down or whether their dividend go up or down.

People whose incentives are similar to owners will behave like owners. That's how incentives work. When things like citizenship = voting + right to live is tradeable like shares, then people incentives will be more aligned. 

To keep things democracy, make 80%-90% of shareholders to be visitors.

Basically it's similar to Moldbug except that moldbug probably hate democratic elements. But the idea is the same. Turn cities/provinces/counties/countries into joint stock companies with clear owners.

Then something Ancap wants, namely everything is done by private sectors will work.

Right of the bat, I see significant improvement.

No more cradle to grave welfare recipients. Anyone wants to have children got to buy extra citizenship. All voters, rich or poor, have strong incentive to discourage cradle to grave welfare recipients. They dilute "shares".

That's a very toward libertarian moves.

Treating tax payers more nicely and lowering tax. We see this in Singapore, Dubai, Monaco, and Liechestein. With costly cradle to grave welfare recipients gone, governments will have strong incentives to keep street clean.

Other libertarians right can be obtained by competition among jurisdiction. Like drugs? Don't like drugs? Like fentanyl criminalized but MDMA and meth legal?

Shop around.

The real metric would be, is this a good policies. Will our share price go up.

I think democracy is a form of formalism. It makes things more explicit disprovable and make things less of a mystery.

In general, all government, even monarchy got to care about what people want. They need soldiers. People move to better governed feudal lords.

However government obligation to the people is usually vague. Usually it's a lie that come with religion. Nobody can proof or disproof a dude is a good king or not. Different dudes think differently.

Some kings are doing well. Dubai, Monaco, Liechtenstein.

But till when?

China also had great emperors. Huang Lao emperors, Empress Lu, Wen Jing era and Ming Zheng, are quite libertarian.

But I wouldn't say democracy is wrong.

At least under democracy, there is something that we can all verify. Number of votes. Without that, we may resolves our differences with civil war again.

That being said, number of voters and approval rating is very far from scam proof.

So another step of formalism will simply turn voters into shareholders. Now everybody can verify if their share prices go up or down or whether their dividend go up or down.

People whose incentives are similar to owners will behave like owners. That's how incentives work. When things like citizenship = voting + right to live is tradeable like shares, then people incentives will be more aligned. 

To keep things democracy, make 80%-90% of shareholders to be visitors.

Basically it's similar to Moldbug except that moldbug probably hate democratic elements. But the idea is the same. Turn cities/provinces/counties/countries into joint stock companies with clear owners.

Then something Ancap wants, namely everything is done by private sectors will work.

Right of the bat, I see significant improvement.

No more cradle to grave welfare recipients. Anyone wants to have children got to buy extra citizenship. All voters, rich or poor, have strong incentive to discourage cradle to grave welfare recipients. They dilute "shares".

That's a very toward libertarian moves.

Treating tax payers more nicely and lowering tax. We see this in Singapore, Dubai, Monaco, and Liechestein. With costly cradle to grave welfare recipients gone, governments will have strong incentives to keep street clean.

Other libertarians right can be obtained by competition among jurisdiction. Like drugs? Don't like drugs? Like fentanyl criminalized but MDMA and meth legal?

Shop around.

The real metric would be, is this a good policies. Will our share price go up.

I think most bullshit, and conflicts, will be gone with price discovery. That many problems in this world happen because we don't have enough price discovery.

Say I want to make a nail factory. The first thing I need to do is to know the price of nail and the price of whatever it takes to produce those nails.

Will there be enough supply or demand issue?

Sure. But natural price discovery is when supply and demand meet and price discovery alone is a major part of decision making.

Without price for nail, who can make such decisions? This is classical libertarian samples why centralized planning don't work by the way.

Say I want to pick a major for college. The first thing I check is how much money the major pays.

Of course that's not the only thing I consider. Computer science is not the highest paid major. I also consider that I like software way more than hardware. Turns out I was lucky. Computer science also allows me to be entrepreneurs. But market rate for programmers are a great way to help me make decisions.

Let's see other things.

Say a confused 12 years old kid are told that he is in the wrong gender and that he will be a real woman after transitioning.

Something most conservative don't see is that those "ideas" are actually hard to disprove. You can't really disprove that. It's just how you define "real women". If combined with saying trans are not real women is hate speech almost nothing can be said.

But say there is a price discovery. We know how much a real woman's market rate for sugar baby and we know the rate for trans women sugar baby.

A confused 12 years old kid can simply see that the market rate for trans women sugar baby is 0 or negative. Nobody wants to date trans women. He is not going to be a real woman or even if he is technically "real" women he is changing himself into something with low market price. The price discovery will show him that all the way before he did something stupid.

Another issue is birth rate. Should a smart pretty 18 years old woman choose to be in college debt pursuing women studies or just be a baby mama or heir factory for rich men?

Without price discovery, this is a very hard thing to decide.

But if we take into account that our utility function depends not only on money coming to our pocket but also money coming to our biological children's pocket, we can still use some price discovery.

Many rich men happily give a lot of money to his biological children. You don't take it with you. When Wendy Deng choose to have children with Murdoch, her daughters got billions of dollars.

Price discovery in reproductive market help women make better decisions and the main beneficiaries are the children themselves.

Of course actual math would involve the woman's actual utility function converted to money metric equivalent. But simple summing things up together would still give good ballpark which decisions is more profitable.

Finally we have citizenship issues. Many Americans complain about rich billionaires hiring Americans as surrogates and those children got American citizenship because they're born in US.

Is this a good idea? Well. Without price discovery, we know nothing. With price discovery, we can ask, how much each American citizenship worth? Just make the billionaires pay.

Why do people allow welfare recipients to have 60 children with tax payers money but complain about billionaires having lots of surrogates?

I think Americans are already pretty good at this kind of Math. China, for example, doesn't allow surrogacy even though their birth rate is very low. Chinese too should ask, how much Chinese citizenship worth.

Israel and Palestinians have been at war for decades. Look. Turn disputed regions into a small country. Trade citizenship. Whoever isn't happy leave. Whoever wants to stay buy citizenships.

Now it doesn't have to be a small country. It can be small private cities with shares instead of citizenship.

Somebody have given me 3 samples.

1. Friends

2. Families

3. Communities

Let's examine friends. Elon befriend Jensen Huang. They eat lunch together. Sometimes Elon pay, sometimes Jensen pay. They ride private planes together. Go to billionaire club together.

Then Elon says I need 10k GPU. How would they do so? Tit for tat? You help me once lah give me 10k GPU. Latter you need money I give you money.

No. They turn that 10k GPU into transactions.

So friends trade when money is significant. Things are commodified when money is significant.

Families. Not a valid counter example. In US you can't pay women to be your wife. In Indonesia you can. It's called contract marriage. Not illegal. Not legally recognized either. In US you have sugar relationship I think. It's commodified.

Ah. But people still get married you said. They still have boyfriends/girlfriends. Fair enough. But that's because transactional relationship is very restrictive. Like do it too openly you hit prostitution laws. Also child support is far from normal market contract. The laws, rather than agreement decide the amount.

Ironically, a woman that love her children would agree to a contract where the men pays a lot to children's portfolio. Rich men would prefer that too. But the court make such contract impossible. Money got to go mom.

There's surrogacy. But it has restrictions. Like the eggs can't be from the same donor with mom and you can't surrogate "normal way".

So families are not commodified because commodification is legally complex.

The last one is communities. That's also a very interesting counter example. See. The jews used to have this privatized communities called Kibbutzim. It's not commodified. They stick around due to shared ideology and so on.

After a while, many Kibbutzim becomes joint stock kibbutzim. So shares are tradeable. And the commodified version is simply better I think.

But yea. Are there privatized communities that's not commodified? Amish society isn't. So it's a valid counter example.

Another sample is nation state. Citizenship of most nation states are not commodified. Even though technically there is nothing in international laws that says a state cannot declare that their citizenship is tradeable.

And I think this is a very interesting counter example. If citizenship is tradeable and have market price, I think libertarianism will win. Many of our ideas are kardol hicks efficient and would improve citizenship market price.

Why it doesn't?

Another sample is a dynastic rulers that behave like owners on a state. Often, those are pretty economically libertarian. Things like small kingdoms like Monaco, Dubai, Macau, Liechtenstein.

I want to explore more of this idea.

I think price discovery and market transactions improve humans well being and when not restricted we will tend to commodify all things, if not most things.

Any interesting samples or counter examples?

And I think the solution is compatible with anarcho capitalism. That is the network of private cities type. I would add moldbugian and henry george idea for stability.

I think libertarians can be more consistent and practical. Extent what's working on capitalism to other area of life. And be more successful bringing libertarianiam on earth.

1. Embrace inequality of reproductive success. Can Elon have $1 trillion ethically. Yes. Can elon has 1 million children ethically? The answer is yes too.
2. Anything monetarily significant should be a business transaction or a business. In fact most large businesses are joint stock companies. Government too should be a joint stock company. This is addressed by moldbug and henry George. Properly aligned profit not moral should be our fuel to profit. Things that are not monetarily significant can be tit for tat. But that only works for small money. Even then, it's actually transactional. If you are not nice to people that are nice to you then you lost friends.
3. Things will naturally be commodified. It's the only way things like price discovery can guide us to resources. When we are free we tend to commodify things. Sex and organ trading is not commodified because we are not free to commodify them. Capitalism is not just about consent but also commodification and price system.

Some libertarians still think things like having children shouldn't be commodified. Well. What is it? Dad agree to pay mok to profuce heirs and you disagree? You're not a libertarian. You're a progressive/conservative

Let's compare libertarianism and islam, for example. Islamics allow polygamy and have more children. Now do you ever hear anyone fearing Europe turn libertarian?

Reproductive success is the key. One Elon makes speech free and save Americans from Commiela.

Imagine if Elon has 1k children. Or 1 million.

We got to breed those that make the world more libertarian. Businessmen, workers, CEOs, start up founders.

How? By making it easy to do so. Money communism sucks. But gene pool survival communism, things that prevent rich men from fathering children they can easily afford is worse.

What is your experience?

I just lost $xxxx. I clicked a google sponsored link for uniswap and that's ALWAYS phishing site.

Then it asks me to connect and asks for unlimited approval of USDC.

So many things were on my mind.

1. Why was I need to connect again? I am already connected to uniswap
2. Why would it asks unlimited approval of USDC?
3. This could be phishing and if I click confirm I will lost all of my money on that wallet
4. I didn't want to check URL because I fear the URL will be similar and I may click confirm
5. I was impatient because checking my limit orders are usually fast
6. The only alternative I can think of is to repeat the whole thing again. Search for uniswap again. But I fear I will just be in this same situation again and again and again.

So within that 1 seconds I press confirm and lost all my money in my wallet. After that I realized that the URL isn't even uniswap.

That's very stupid. I didn't even plan to approve anything. I just want to check my limit order.

I reported a bunch of ads to google but the ads are still there. ALL sponsored sites for uniswap at google is phishing.

What's your experience?

Notice I was scammed by a different things but this is how it works

https://preview.redd.it/t49slrhok7ah1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=8c86d7d8713ec252349686d5d95ebda575661910

You search uniswap at google.

Google make sponsored listing LOOKS EXACTLY like search side. You see that https://business.google.com? It redirect to a phishing site

If you connect your wallet and approve spending you lost ALL your money. That's how I got scammed.

The advertisers often change. Before it's watech. Now it's Lovead limited. Reporting to google is useless. I reported again and again and again and after a few days, it shows up again and again and again. ALL google sponsored link for dexed domain is Phishing.

I can't post the link to the phishing site

It looks like this

https://uniswap-connect-gateway.********.com/uni-dapp/

Yes looking at the domain name is the SUREST way to know it's phishing. I didn't look in time

The sites look like this

https://preview.redd.it/lrqej8n8l7ah1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=1e7779b3bd431ab5188045a7184041d1d05dc823

https://preview.redd.it/jreup0ywk7ah1.png?width=1394&format=png&auto=webp&s=7338c36340a99c0f11be30b08abfb9be3d887fb5

What is your experience?

I just lost $xxxx. I clicked a google sponsored link for uniswap and that's ALWAYS phishing site.

Then it asks me to connect and asks for unlimited approval of USDC.

So many things were on my mind.

1. Why was I need to connect again? I am already connected to uniswap
2. Why would it asks unlimited approval of USDC?
3. This could be phishing and if I click confirm I will lost all of my money on that wallet
4. I didn't want to check URL because I fear the URL will be similar and I may click confirm
5. I was impatient because checking my limit orders are usually fast
6. The only alternative I can think of is to repeat the whole thing again. Search for uniswap again. But I fear I will just be in this same situation again and again and again.

So within that 1 seconds I press confirm and lost all my money in my wallet. After that I realized that the URL isn't even uniswap.

That's very stupid. I didn't even plan to approve anything. I just want to check my limit order.

I reported a bunch of ads to google but the ads are still there. ALL sponsored sites for uniswap at google is phishing.

What's your experience?

Notice I was scammed by a different things but this is how it works

https://preview.redd.it/t49slrhok7ah1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=8c86d7d8713ec252349686d5d95ebda575661910

You search uniswap at google.

Google make sponsored listing LOOKS EXACTLY like search side. You see that https://business.google.com? It redirect to a phishing site

If you connect your wallet and approve spending you lost ALL your money. That's how I got scammed.

The advertisers often change. Before it's watech. Now it's Lovead limited. Reporting to google is useless. I reported again and again and again and after a few days, it shows up again and again and again. ALL google sponsored link for dexed domain is Phishing.

I can't post the link to the phishing site

It looks like this

https://uniswap-connect-gateway.********.com/uni-dapp/

Yes looking at the domain name is the SUREST way to know it's phishing. I didn't look in time

The sites look like this

https://preview.redd.it/lrqej8n8l7ah1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=1e7779b3bd431ab5188045a7184041d1d05dc823

https://preview.redd.it/jreup0ywk7ah1.png?width=1394&format=png&auto=webp&s=7338c36340a99c0f11be30b08abfb9be3d887fb5

I got a theory.

Commodification is good.

What I mean by commodification is

1. People are free to buy and sell

2. No too much restrictive terms. They can name their prices

3. There is price discovery.

4. Pimps/middle men that reduce transaction costs are completely legal. Things like eBay, Uber, and so on. Escrows will be common.

Buying and selling sex, organs, houses, TVs, reproductive services is good. Even citizenship should be commodified.

Good in a sense that it tend to improve utility function of people that are buying and selling. Otherwise they just don't do that.

Here, utility function is "tendency" or "preferences".

I like the word tendency. We tend to predict people will commodify things if commodification is legal and open.

For example, say someone is considering donating plasma. Here he will be better off selling plasma instead of donating.

People that wants kidney prefer to pay for it.

Some libertarians say, commodification should be legal but they don't prefer it.

For example, most libertarians think that sex trade should be legal. However, they would say they are not interested in it.

In my opinion, there isn't really middle ground.

If government legalize sex trade, or organ trades, then most sex and organ will be commodified. It will be bought and sold freely. There will be price discovery.

In other words, other market will collapse.

Romance and government infested marriage will be mostly destroyed when people are free to buy and sell sex and reproductive service.

In fact, I would argue that the very reason why certain things are not legally commodified is precisely because governments know that most people will buy and sell stuffs if it's legal to do so.

I would need samples and counter examples

1. Sex. Rich men don't just pay women to give them heirs. But the reason why is because simply paying women to give you heirs is not free. The price is decided and heavily regulated by child support laws.

2. Organs. Only in Iran people buy and sell organs freely. In Iran, organs are commodified. In US no. But that's because it's illegal. Of course there are black markets and so on.

3. TV. It's legally commodified. So it's commodified.

So it seems that my theory is correct. If it's legal or practical to commodify something people commodify it. It's just a better way to do things.

Any counter example?

I suppose some people may still want romance even when prostitution is legal. But prostitution is not a perfect substitute for romance. For example, some people want long term relationship.

But some people now have sugar relationship. They have long term relationship and that's a bit commodified too. The fact that normal dating is still around is probably because sugar relationship is not something people can fully open talking about. Or perhaps some women are not pretty enough to be sugar babies and make more money as engineers.

Can you think of samples where commodification is reasonably openly discussed, legal, and practical, and yet people don't do it?

So things like sex, reproduction, organs, citizenship, should be commodified. In fact, I personally think commodification can be just as important if not more than "consent".

That if things are not commodified there is a good chance it's not truly consensual.

Look at things that aren't commodified. Organs or sex, for example. That's mainly because there are laws against commodification. If there is no such laws, almost nobody would want to donate organs. Why donate if you can sell?

Fully consensual things tend to be commodified anyway. Like what is not commodified? Organs? Yea that's because we have laws against it. So organ donation isn't really consensual. Nobody would donate if they can sell. Government pressure or force people to donate by blocking them from selling at higher price.

Commodification may not always mean consensual but counter exception is rare and when things are hairy, like as in the state, commodification is an improvement.

One I can think of is Jason Brennan. He authors Markets without limits. I will read that.

Another is Moldbug. He thinks governments should be a joint stock companies. What he means is share of governments should be commodified.

The benefit of commodification is plenty. We got price discovery. We can know a company is being run well or not.

Consent is more clear.

If terms are repugnant, people just walk away EARLY.

So for example, in marriage, a woman may say in front, hei, if I got knocked up by other dudes you still gonna pay right? If reproduction is commodified, a man will just run away from women demanding that. Basically that's how privatized marriage is. People explicitly agreed on material terms. If they don't they leave.

I would go further more than Jason Brennan. I think commodification is more important than just consent.

For example, is my relationship with Dubai government consensual? Some would say yes. If I don't like Dubai I just don't go there. In fact, I don't. Some would say no. Dubai is government. It has tax that's low but tax is robbery.

Here, when Dubai is run like a business, well, consensual or not, we still got that normal capitalist treatment. Tax too high, taxpayers are gone. Streets not safe, taxpayers are gone. So Dubai, Monaco, Macao, Singapore, has low taxes and safe street. Obviously an improvement compared to normal democracy.

Another is kibbutzim vs joint stock kibbutzim. Both are private communities. Is it consensual to have to follow the rule in a privatized communities? Arguable. But joint stock kibbutzim is commodified. You can buy and sell shares. Members know the valuation of their share and dividends they get. So it's better and richer.

So I think I am not sure I am still a libertarian. Save for really bad deals like slavery, I totally support commodification and commercialization of everything. Citizenship, sex, reproduction, stuffs.

Any prominent libertarians thinkers that agree with me?

Any critic or support for the idea?

Words like uniswap or any known dex.

I lost $20k due to one of those ads.

Since then I have reported the issue to google several time.

Still google ads contain phishing sites again and again. The advertisers are also always the same

WHATECH MOBILE CO., LIMITED

searching for the company names show a lot of people told that it's a scammy company already