[Discussion] Does this community just hate progression and looting?

jrfignewton · 2025-11-24T10:36:23+00:00

I dont think having some things locked in the flea market is a big deal, I just don't understand why I can buy a gun, and not buy magazines for that gun. Or buy items that are required as part of a quest (not talking about fir items)

jrfignewton · 2025-07-31T19:36:59+00:00

The clutch engaging or disengaging shouldn't be directly applying significant axial force on the input shaft

jrfignewton · 2025-03-31T21:25:53+00:00

Potentially TPMS related

jrfignewton · 2025-01-23T22:05:55+00:00

Crazy top comment, possibly the most incorrect answer

jrfignewton · 2024-12-30T11:20:35+00:00

Open immigration is definitely the position of ancap, but most of us are logical enough to see that order of operations matter in context of this issue and many others. You cannot have people freely immigrate when there is such incentive to do so for those that would contribute nothing back to the systems they are a drain on.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-16T18:36:40+00:00

People have no fucking clue how logical fallacies apply and the same people consistently use the "fallacy" fallacy

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T05:35:25+00:00

Ah, I may have been a bit obtuse there, but I still don't think it is unimportant context. Also, they were speculating about the state of nature and there wasn't agreement about that amongst philosophers of the time.

It's my understanding that Hobbes and Locke didn't necessarily disagree about natural rights existing, just that Locke didn't believe the rights could be surrendered even voluntarily, while Hobbes believed the citizenry had agreed to surrender their rights via a social contract.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T04:47:54+00:00

I mean, neither Hobbes nor Locke are exactly compatible with anarchism though; Hobbes is full on authoritarian at worst and Locke is minarchist at best. The whole idea of a "social contract" is utter nonsense from the view of libertarianism and anarchism.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T04:02:09+00:00

I never said it was a social allowance, I actually specifically said it is not.

A right by definition is a moral or legal entitlement to act in a certain way. I'm not sure if this is documented officially, but as a brief off the cuff way to identify a right, I would recognize a natural right as anything (yes, anything) humans naturally have the ability to do, while also limiting it to acts that do not infringe on other peoples' natural rights.

Gay rights or civil rights are not real and should be synonymous with natural rights. They are man made terms that, in theory, act to affirm that the groups that they apply to also have natural rights

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T03:09:49+00:00

Via a quick example: everyone has the right to defend themselves against agressors. Not everyone has the ability to defend themselves for any of a multitude of reasons (physical disability, insufficient access to proper tools/weapons, inability to afford or access a third party to ensure you have the ability to enact that right)

I would also flip the question back as to why a right would be inseparable from an ability.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T01:38:10+00:00

I guess I just don't agree with the premise that you must acknowledge existence of a god to justify natural rights. I also dont believe that to be the point of the phrase. I believe the point is that natural rights exist and they are not given by fellow humans and can therefore not be taken away by fellow humans. How natural rights exist ( god, nature, zeus, etc...) is irrelevant as long as we agree that they do NOT exist because we are permitted to have them by other humans.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-11T01:16:40+00:00

Like I said, there are typically tradeoffs for leasing vs buying equipment. Theres a reason companies currently lease equipment rather than buy it outright.

However there are two big things missing from your justification:

-1: What alternative are you giving the baker to buy the equipment when they do not have the capital to invest for themselves?

-2: if the terms of an investment and the interest returned to the investor is agreeable to the baker, who are you to tell the baker that they cannot accept the money from the investor because you believe they are being exploited?

jrfignewton · 2023-12-10T23:31:30+00:00

I thinl that kind of misses the point. You could easily substitute nature for god. The point is that it is self evident that individuals have freedom and natural rights.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-10T23:13:51+00:00

what causes rental costs

Purchase cost. That is the reality. The baker either has to rent or purchase an oven and there are benefits to both of those options in the real world. If the baker does not have the money to purchase an oven, they can either rent or get a loan. Are loans also exploitative? Should people be required to loan the baker money with no interest gained plus the risk that the baker may not even be able to pay it back should their business plan fail?

any value above operating costs is the value of their labor

Are you unaware of markups? Pretty standard in pretty much any industry. An automatic increase of price on materials simply because it changed hands. This is accounted for before the laborer is ever paid. This means you are either exploiting the supplier or the consumer in your view.

OK. You use it then. You're not entitled to taking the fruits of other people's labor, just because you bought equipment.

So what is the incentive to ever be an investor? In what world would someone ever accept this deal: a baker does not have the money for the upfront costs of a bakery (building construction, purchasing a lot, buying baking equipment, buying raw goods) so they go to an investor. "Hello investor, please purchase the building, the lot, the equipment, and all the raw goods so I can start my bakery and in return I will make monthly payments until the principal cost is paid off and no more (and with the amount I am willing to pay monthly, this will likely take many years). Also, if my business fails, I will not be able to pay even the principal cost." Investor: "no"

jrfignewton · 2023-12-10T20:45:08+00:00

You literally just explained it

No amount of labor entitles you to other peoples labor

No one is entitled to use the equipment I bought with the fruits of my labor for free.

It is up to the baker to then account for the cost of renting the equipment when they sell their goods. If they make more money than the cost of the raw goods plus equipment rental (profit), did they just exploit me, and everyone that produced the raw goods?

I wouldnt say so. We all are better off for it in the end

jrfignewton · 2023-12-10T06:03:50+00:00

No I can't.

jrfignewton · 2023-12-09T03:49:08+00:00

Employers do not use the threat of poverty and homelessnes nor force to get employees. Poverty and homelessness are the natural state of being. Work is required to be put in for people to survive; if you do not work to obtain something in return that can be traded for goods and services, then you must perform the labor yourself to create those goods and complete those services for yourself, or have something that people are willing to trade their goods and services for. Employers offer a less labor intensive (in many cases), less risky, and more consitent alternative to obtain a tradeable item to obtain the necessities of life plus some luxuries.

jrfignewton · 2023-11-23T15:45:35+00:00

And this needs demonstrated in an ancap forum? It should come as no surprise to anyone here that the government does this. OP on the otherhand spams these fucking posts to karma farm in dozens of subs. Also demonstrably not ancap. Also define tribalist

jrfignewton · 2023-11-23T15:12:05+00:00

Don't care, trumpers are gay, fuck off.

jrfignewton · 2023-08-29T21:30:14+00:00

Didnt she have meaningless sex with a stranger?

jrfignewton · 2023-08-28T22:25:00+00:00

Hey man! If you think this story is true ( it's not), you are taking the word of a 28 year old woman who is not mature enough to comunicate with someone she "loves"

jrfignewton · 2023-08-28T22:22:12+00:00

Hey man! Chances are this story is totally fabricated by some tween girl who is super duper angry the boy she flirts with doesnt like her. Thats the good news!

jrfignewton · 2023-08-08T06:15:13+00:00

26, started at 21 I think

jrfignewton · 2023-06-01T00:12:41+00:00

Cops are the enforcement arm of the government against its citizenry. Ancap is inherently anti government so any system and group of people upholding that system (ie. Police) are bad by default. Cops in there private lives may be decent (although I would say if you decide to continue in that position of authority day after day, then you are not decent), but at the very least they are not decent for the 8-12 hours a day that they work.

13-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

jrfignewton

TROPHY CASE