PDA

View Full Version : Creating a Free Market Society?




krazy kaju
11-29-2008, 09:00 PM
So here's my idea:

We get at least a few dozen laissez-faire types together. We then buy a large amount of cheap land in somewhere like Montana, combine that land, and put it under a charter. The charter would be unchangeable, but all the land would be collectively owned by all the "residents" of the "charter land" for legal purposes. However, the charter would make it such that people can "buy" and "sell" charter land - the catch is that it still is "legally" owned by everyone. That way, people can't break away from the charter land.

On this land, it is everything go pretty much. We can avoid most regulation and taxation simply by hiding behind the mask of a barter economy by using gold, silver, copper, etc. In reality, we'd really be using real, hard money, but maybe the monetary authorities would ignore our little experiment.

The land and charter would be protected by a militia made up of all residents. This militia would be the common protection against anyone who wishes to intrude on the charter property (i.e. if government tries to steal the hard money). People would also be able to contract private courts to resolve disputes between everyone.

Sound good?

EDIT: Something similar is already being tried: http://www.paulville.org/

The_Orlonater
11-29-2008, 09:04 PM
http://www.freestateproject.org/

Conza88
11-29-2008, 09:08 PM
http://www.freestateproject.org/

lol

The_Orlonater
11-29-2008, 09:12 PM
lol

I'm a secessionist. My dream is that we all secede and we have a few million in our new free republic. We will expand the cities and buy land everywhere. When you immigrate here, don't be expecting a check for free.

danberkeley
11-29-2008, 09:30 PM
So here's my idea:

We get at least a few dozen laissez-faire types together. We then buy a large amount of cheap land in somewhere like Montana, combine that land, and put it under a charter. The charter would be unchangeable, but all the land would be collectively owned by all the "residents" of the "charter land" for legal purposes. However, the charter would make it such that people can "buy" and "sell" charter land - the catch is that it still is "legally" owned by everyone. That way, people can't break away from the charter land.

On this land, it is everything go pretty much. We can avoid most regulation and taxation simply by hiding behind the mask of a barter economy by using gold, silver, copper, etc. In reality, we'd really be using real, hard money, but maybe the monetary authorities would ignore our little experiment.

The land and charter would be protected by a militia made up of all residents. This militia would be the common protection against anyone who wishes to intrude on the charter property (i.e. if government tries to steal the hard money). People would also be able to contract private courts to resolve disputes between everyone.

Sound good?

Not so far. Please give more detail. Also, I get confuse when yo say "buy" and "sell" because I am not sure if you actually mean "buy" or "sell" or not.

Conza88
11-30-2008, 12:13 AM
I'm a secessionist. My dream is that we all secede and we have a few million in our new free republic. We will expand the cities and buy land everywhere. When you immigrate here, don't be expecting a check for free.

:)

krazy kaju
11-30-2008, 02:27 PM
The land would be owned communally by law. That is, the government wouldn't be able to seize the property of just one person. However, the charter would set up a market for land. In essence, you would "buy" land from the charter, it would be all yours. This wouldn't be recognized by law though. This would be in order to enforce the rules of the charter, i.e. full reserve banking, no violation of others' property rights, etc.

krazy kaju
11-30-2008, 03:07 PM
Something similar to what I'm proposing is being tried right now in West Texas. http://www.paulville.org/

danberkeley
11-30-2008, 03:19 PM
i dont see the benefits of having the land be communally owned. why not do everything through contract. free trade would be enforced by agreements to "not charge tariffs", "no eminant domain" etc. the owners of the lands could form a corporation that hires "border" protect and general security. members of the corporation could withdraw or "secede" when ever they want, not have to comply with stuff that violates any agreement or contract. decision wont have to made democratically.

UnReconstructed
11-30-2008, 03:42 PM
http://www.freestateproject.org/

this

krazy kaju
12-03-2008, 02:19 PM
i dont see the benefits of having the land be communally owned. why not do everything through contract. free trade would be enforced by agreements to "not charge tariffs", "no eminant domain" etc. the owners of the lands could form a corporation that hires "border" protect and general security. members of the corporation could withdraw or "secede" when ever they want, not have to comply with stuff that violates any agreement or contract. decision wont have to made democratically.

The entire idea is to not let in people who would wish to reverse this freedom city, which is why you would need a contract making sure that all land can only be traded between certain approved members.

It would also be helpful in avoiding any kind of local government, taxation, etc. encroaching upon this area.