by Ethan Glover, Thu, Sep 19, 2013 - (Edited) Thu, Sep 19, 2013
Sometimes as an anarcho-capitalist I find it hard to read the news. The problems that the media spouts about and worries about every single day can be easily solved. It's not that I think my particular viewpoints on things are superior and that if I were just put in charge of everything it would all be better. Rather, it is the fact that someone else is doing just that. Or to be accurate, everyone else is doing just that. If people would just get out of each others way and seek solutions to their own problems rather than trying to play some sort of superiority card, we would see a much better world. These are the anarcho-capitalist solutions to modern day problems.
Bloomberg recently reported that the only jobs that are on the rise are low-wage jobs. Young men and women are leaving college only to find that their degree is essentially worthless. They are only finding jobs that normally don't require a degree like waiting tables and Starbucks. One student, who finished her residency to become a dentist has to commute across state lines due to government restrictions on what states she is allowed to work in. Many students are not so lucky. A lot of them are dropping out of the workforce or accepting the fact that they will never be able to work a high quality job and simply go for low wage jobs.
The first problem in all of this is the monopoly that the government holds on accreditation. Instead of colleges having to develop reputations and recognition by multiple and private institutions, the colleges must simply meet state requirements, offer state required classes and allow the government to push tons of loans and subsidies on the schools. Without this monopoly colleges would simply compete in their own ways to attract customers who all have different needs, wants and learning styles. When you allow for competition, you allow for diversity and experimentation that inevitably leads to higher quality and cheaper education.
Next, there is the problem of subsidies and loans. Many people think this is a way to keep college costs down. In reality what they do is allow for more students to enroll in college in the short run, thus drives up demand which only drives up prices. This also allows for students who are not prepared for college to enter and spend their government loans and grants on partying. College is not for everyone, and when you allow these people to enter en masse you essentially drive down the standards of colleges and create badly educated people with degrees and a glut in the market. The ultimate result is many stupid people with degrees which makes it difficult for companies to find quality employees within the U.S.. Add in business taxes and strict regulations and you have a perfect recipe for outsourcing. This also of course points to the problem brought up earlier of people with valid degrees and knowledge who are not able to do certain jobs because they are restricted to particular states.
The solutions to these problems are quite simple, and it is merely to get out of the way and allow for dynamic adaptation. Without the government, we would be able to see competing "accreditation agencies" that develop a reputation for only picking quality schools. Non-accredited schools are OK and can lead to a degree, but without a stamp of approval from a third party review institution, students may have a hard time finding work and are, therefore, much less likely to choose those schools.
With the lack of subsidies and government loans, we would see a temporary drop in enrollment. However, in the world of competition we would see more schools with cheaper models. Salman Khan, founder of Khan Academy, wrote a book called "The One World Schoolhouse which outlines his plan to bring a world class education to the world for free. I personally own the book and highly recommend it. The point is that in modern day society, young men and women should not be paying $400 per credit hour when most of what they learn is stuff they don't want to and don't need to learn, but are required to by the state; or when the education is piss poor, but they have no other choice.
Ron Paul has even offered his words on the idea of homeschooling rather than subjecting children to government run schools. His book, which is a new release, is called "The School Revolution". It shows parents and readers the benefits of choosing homeschool and how to homeschool.
Of course, he has also built a website for homeschool curriculum that costs $250 per year and an extra $50 per class. This is a program that focuses on reading, writing and even building a business. It teaches kids how to learn and how to appreciate knowledge. It gets them prepared for life which simply can not be said about government schools. Government schools are just there to pump kids through the system whether they are learning anything or not. It does not even prepare them for college, a subject that would lead us back to current colleges being filled with drunken halfwits.
The point of mentioning all of this is that there are current solutions to the problems with jobs. Kids and young adults are not being prepared for the future, and they are not gaining proper knowledge through government institutions. Many students who care about their education (including me) must find ways to supplement the education they pay for in their spare time. This is certainly not ideal and a pathetic representation of the education system.
The only reason for public schools is indoctrination. It is just a way for the government to create good livestock that will make them money. The trillions of dollars in debt that the government has is a promise on the future production of "their" citizens. The governments' goal is to keep people paying taxes and to keep taking out loans so they can support the governments borrowing with interest.
Due to the liberal nature of public education and the fact colleges are publicly funded, institutions of "higher learning" are often rife with liberal politicians disguising themselves as professors. The following video is not rare and a common occurrence in many college classrooms. Professors can often be found preaching their moronic babble to already dumbed down students who are raised to accept authority thanks to public grade schools.
Who is going to pay for your college education? How about you? Kids are being taught that someone must take care of them and that someone is and always will be the government. This ignores the fact that it is funded by ponzi schemes and ignores the reality of using stolen money to pay for useless "education". This "education" gives these kids nothing and does not prepare them for life in the least bit.
Instead of colleges adapting to what they really are and just offering "fast food preparation majors", they have started to lean towards federal and state paid jobs. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University is going to start offering postgraduate programs in drone piloting. That is, after people spend their life savings and rack up a massive debt on a college education, they can be trained to pilot drones. This is a 6-month program that leads to a $150k/year paycheck. This University recognizes that it's degrees are worthless but still wants the money for offering them. So this program gives students the opportunity to make a lot of money acting as murderers. The government claims this will create 23,000 more jobs but what they don't tell you is that it's at the taxpayers expense. These high paying hitman jobs are nothing more than welfare.
Of course, we do not see government livestock training in colleges only. A recent story over at BenSwann.com showed the following question from a grade school worksheet:
As you can see, the student was counted wrong for saying that a police officer may not confiscate weapons even when the owner has the "proper permit". The story goes on to talk about Common Core, which is the new education standard being implemented across the country. The idea is to get kids to use emotions to manipulate people into accepting social change. It is a liberal dream to abuse children in this way to see their misguided ideas of society come to fruition.
Eric Holder has been pushing for the constant brainwashing of children in this way just to get illegal gun regulation laws passed.
All of this not only highlights the problems with public schools and exactly why people should refuse to use them and teach their kids properly. It also highlights disappearing property rights, or to be more specific, disappearing gun rights.
The government has been pumping livestock through its "schools" and putting people into perpetual debt and giving them worthless degrees. Ironically, while a lot of trained "philosophers", "political scientists" and "underwater basket weavers" are finding their place at Starbucks, we now see anti gun rules from the company. Following the Naval Yard shooting people can no longer carry guns into Starbucks, making Starbucks a prime target for criminals looking for people who are easy to take advantage of. Of course, the company isn't putting out a real ban, it's just a suggestion. You see, all those college grads are too afraid to ask gun carriers to leave because obviously doing so would cause a western movie style shootout.
Starbucks, as a private company, (not as a government corporation), has every right to not allow certain things on its property. Gun carriers are more respectful of such rules than anybody else. Of course, the next time they're robbed they should stop and reflect on, "What if half our customers were armed?" It takes a very rare kind of criminal to even think about going after such a place.
This news follows the story of the Naval Yard in which a man was able to take a weapon onto a military base (which is a gun free zone like Starbucks) and kill 13 people. In an interview with the father of a marine that works on the base, noted that the soldiers, who are trained to use weapons properly (hopefully), were not allowed access to their ammo. Being able to do so could have saved many lives. Instead, we got the chaos and stand off that we saw in the naval yard situation.
Again, the solutions to gun violence are painfully clear. When you respect peoples natural property rights, that is their right to buy guns with their earned money. You allow for people to properly protect themselves rather than being constantly vulnerable to any criminal and psychopath who does not care about the law and uses guns anyways.
The government and most people see the military and police as special citizens with special rights and the special abilities to carry the types of guns people like Feinstein speak against as a way to "protect" the public. We can not protect ourselves, but the police who has the worst track record with "peace keeping", is supposed to do it instead?
While having a barbeque, a group of family and friends was reported to the police by a neighbor who lives a block and a half away for "noise violations". This is in contrast to the direct neighbors in the area that had no problem with the level of noise. Police, in their usual fashion barged into the home and kept talking to the residents in a way that instigates anger and problems. They kept pushing until they had some sort of reason to arrest somebody. They went into the situation with that goal in mind. Probably to add to their arrest quota.
The full story, which is quite lengthy, can be read here. It involves an entire family being blatantly harrassed and abused by thugs (police). The video of the interaction can be viewed below.
These kinds of things happen many times a day every single day. We can even find many examples of police killing innocent men, women and children across the country merely because they are nothing more than violent thugs. Americans are roughly 8 times more likely to be killed by a police "officer" than by any sort of "terrorist" which has a much broader definition than "police officer".
We see the solutions to the police state emerging thanks to the dismal performance and dangerous/murderous actions of publicly paid police that can keep their jobs even while acting as criminals. They are protected by the "state" which has a monopoly on force and does not care one bit about people's safety.
The Threat Management Center has emerged in Detroit and offers private security while hiring people who are altruistic and are not there to shoot up "bad guys". This kind of mindset is the kind that public police love but, those people are the ones that look for trouble rather than looking for ways to prevent and decrease trouble. On the legal side of things, there is Shield Mutual, which protects people from the illegal actions of the state. The fact that people need protection from the people who supposed to be protecting them says a lot about the current state we live in.
Really I could go over subject after subject. Things like military leaders losing respect for Obama because of Syria, the NSA and IRS spying on citizens, the new possibility of a currency war and even how and why intellectual property is not property at all. I want to hear your opinions and thoughts though. What do you think is most important and what events do you think would challenge the anarcho-capitalist society? Maybe there's something I missed in the subjects above or maybe you have suggestions for the writing in general. Leave a comment and I will always get back to you.