Atlantis must be free 2
Posted by upston 10 years, 1 month ago to Philosophy
Atlantis must be free part 2
Thanks to all who read or commented on part one. This forum separates itself from the majority in it’s thoughtful and polite responders. As I said in a response to J this concept of a Libertarian city state is real to me and not just some mind game or escapist diversion. Further the goal is not to hide from big brother or the looters in some jungle cultist enclave hoping to go unnoticed, I could do that by myself.
The goal is for a fully functional community, not to get away from it all but to take it all with us. To do that we need that most popular word in real estate form the 80s SYNERGY. A couple of hundred like minded colonists scratching out some kind of survivalist existence on a barren beach is romantic but after the first week or two just boring as hell.
To attract colonists all the basics of modern life are fundamental to success. First and foremost is security and safety, what young couple would put their children in danger by moving them to some waco cult in a distant land, a few perhaps but not the profile we need for a new beginning. We need schools and police and banks and retailers and utilities and doctors and home builders and farmers bla bla bla, the list of essential services is almost endless.
Another sticking point seems to be the “permission” factor. The concern is if given it can be take just as easily. In a thug society this is true, old Russian saying. Best form of government GOOD ZAR, worst form of government BAD ZAR. The whole point of this community is to prevent the looters from taking your stuff at the point of a gun . Permission voluntarily given by two parties or a CONTRACT is the root of all human progress.
Marriage was one of the first forms of contract, tribe A and tribe B would send an emissary to broker the girl and boy, perhaps a cow or two, in holy matrimony. Thus mixing the gene pool and promoting an alliance between the tribes, you can still behead and eat your cousin but it’s less likely. This is permission.
The world has long since divided up every inch of land and ocean so arriving on the beach and planting a flag claiming a hunk is no longer an option. Displacing a resident population by force would make us the very thugs we are complaining about. We need the permission of the current owner just as Midas Mulligan got permission via a land contract to buy the valley. Galt got permission from Mulligan in consideration for assets he provided IE the camo beam and the power generator. But he got PERMISSION from the legal owner as we must.
Perhaps a better objection is how do we enforce this contract, what remedies can protect us if the grantor wants to renege. Lets look at some history of similar agreements. Hong Kong is a small island in the South China Sea, the British needed some room to grow so leased Kowloon for 100 years from the Chinese. The colony grew into a powerhouse economy with five million citizens and one of the highest standards of living in the world. Till the commies showed up.
Like Hong Kong hundreds of duty free zones or trade zone or economic development zones have been created , usually waving all manner of taxes and regulations.. In 2003 93 countries has some kind of free trade zones with 93,000,000 workers benefiting. This is well established law and not likely to be challenged if executed properly.
Most of these trade zones are in developing countries where the promise of establishing opportunities for employment and to attract much needed capital investment is a pressing issue and that is the path of least resistance or maximum influence. Large first world governments will never give consent to a breakaway counter culture, counter to high taxes and tyrannical control. As the saying goes one bad apple spoils the whole barrel.
The competition I referred to would be among a hand picked group of well tenured sovereign democratic respected albeit small and some even unheard of nations. We would be granted our own free everything zone for a substantial one time cash prize for a suitable remote uninhabited location within the existing nation, hiding in plain sight. The permission or agreement would be voted on by the legislature and indorsed by the head of state. The first of the contestants to comply with our conditions would win the prize. Then the real fun begins.
How to finance this enterprise , set the terms and select the best five or six locations will be in part three but it’s as easy as falling of a log.
Thanks to all who read or commented on part one. This forum separates itself from the majority in it’s thoughtful and polite responders. As I said in a response to J this concept of a Libertarian city state is real to me and not just some mind game or escapist diversion. Further the goal is not to hide from big brother or the looters in some jungle cultist enclave hoping to go unnoticed, I could do that by myself.
The goal is for a fully functional community, not to get away from it all but to take it all with us. To do that we need that most popular word in real estate form the 80s SYNERGY. A couple of hundred like minded colonists scratching out some kind of survivalist existence on a barren beach is romantic but after the first week or two just boring as hell.
To attract colonists all the basics of modern life are fundamental to success. First and foremost is security and safety, what young couple would put their children in danger by moving them to some waco cult in a distant land, a few perhaps but not the profile we need for a new beginning. We need schools and police and banks and retailers and utilities and doctors and home builders and farmers bla bla bla, the list of essential services is almost endless.
Another sticking point seems to be the “permission” factor. The concern is if given it can be take just as easily. In a thug society this is true, old Russian saying. Best form of government GOOD ZAR, worst form of government BAD ZAR. The whole point of this community is to prevent the looters from taking your stuff at the point of a gun . Permission voluntarily given by two parties or a CONTRACT is the root of all human progress.
Marriage was one of the first forms of contract, tribe A and tribe B would send an emissary to broker the girl and boy, perhaps a cow or two, in holy matrimony. Thus mixing the gene pool and promoting an alliance between the tribes, you can still behead and eat your cousin but it’s less likely. This is permission.
The world has long since divided up every inch of land and ocean so arriving on the beach and planting a flag claiming a hunk is no longer an option. Displacing a resident population by force would make us the very thugs we are complaining about. We need the permission of the current owner just as Midas Mulligan got permission via a land contract to buy the valley. Galt got permission from Mulligan in consideration for assets he provided IE the camo beam and the power generator. But he got PERMISSION from the legal owner as we must.
Perhaps a better objection is how do we enforce this contract, what remedies can protect us if the grantor wants to renege. Lets look at some history of similar agreements. Hong Kong is a small island in the South China Sea, the British needed some room to grow so leased Kowloon for 100 years from the Chinese. The colony grew into a powerhouse economy with five million citizens and one of the highest standards of living in the world. Till the commies showed up.
Like Hong Kong hundreds of duty free zones or trade zone or economic development zones have been created , usually waving all manner of taxes and regulations.. In 2003 93 countries has some kind of free trade zones with 93,000,000 workers benefiting. This is well established law and not likely to be challenged if executed properly.
Most of these trade zones are in developing countries where the promise of establishing opportunities for employment and to attract much needed capital investment is a pressing issue and that is the path of least resistance or maximum influence. Large first world governments will never give consent to a breakaway counter culture, counter to high taxes and tyrannical control. As the saying goes one bad apple spoils the whole barrel.
The competition I referred to would be among a hand picked group of well tenured sovereign democratic respected albeit small and some even unheard of nations. We would be granted our own free everything zone for a substantial one time cash prize for a suitable remote uninhabited location within the existing nation, hiding in plain sight. The permission or agreement would be voted on by the legislature and indorsed by the head of state. The first of the contestants to comply with our conditions would win the prize. Then the real fun begins.
How to finance this enterprise , set the terms and select the best five or six locations will be in part three but it’s as easy as falling of a log.
1. Infrastructure - if Atlantis is of any size there would need to be roads, bridges, etc.. Who pays for and builds them. Does everyone just pay for their own little portion?
2. Governance - if a location is determined and 'x' acres, square miles, etc are acquired, what happens then. Who controls what land is bought, sold, etc and how are records maintained. I can envision a person providing a 'records service' that maintain and track all such information and transactions, but again, would need to be set up at the start.
3. Legal measures - while, in general, people of the mind are inherently rational and able to reason out their differences, differences while arise. Is there to be a court system initiated? A 'council' of founders? (and if so, how is it maintained as they die?).
Obviously, as a sovereign state, Atlanteans would not want to submit themselves to some outside legal system, that would defeat the purpose entirely..
Again, I love the concept. Trying to break my ties to credit debt / servitude that I've allowed myself to be sucked into over the years so that I can rebuild wealth and participate. Just want to make sure that if it is to happen, all eventualities are considered.
One could parcel out residential streets or take shared responsibility for them as a "common element." The residents could then take responsibility for having snow cleared from them. And I imagine that a Homeowners' Association could do a better job with that than the town.
Merchants could take responsiblity for major thoroughfares. Why not? How else are they going to bring in customers and suppliers?
Private operators could run highways and charge tolls. This goes back to when the word "turnpike" actually meant a private toll road. Or else, maybe a federation of long-haul shippers and "tourist attraction" keepers could keep up the highways, for the same reason a local merchant would pay his share to keep up a thoroughfare in town.
The only alternative, I suppose, is to write this kind of contract with those who own and operate "truck stops." So, fine. You get the long-haul truckers and tour bus drivers to pay that fee. The little four-wheelers pulling trailers then "skate."
Better to make that the responsibility of high-volume shippers, and those who operate restaurants, hotels/motels, theme and other parks, campgrounds, etc. that are closer than a specified distance. Even then, how do you make it worth their while?
Maybe I'm just "spit-balling," as Jack Nicholson said. We have a problem. But the government creates a worse problem.
Personally I'm trying to determine what I could do in terms of tradable skill.. I am a regional planner at a mid size trucking company and while I'm good at what I do, planning and scheduling are important in a large scale operation but not as critical or needed in a smaller scale one. While some of my expertise in that area might be sellable, not sure it would feed me all the time. I like to garden so trying to learn more about various things to grow, crop production, cycles, etc..
Climate is the other consideration I've seen discussed and would agree that it is VERY important in terms of being self sufficient. The more tropical the climate the easier it would be to grow much of the food you need...
All locations sound pretty good, except maybe Chile. A lot of Chile is further south, so depending on the islands location could be rough winters..
Just one example of how a private business could provide "infrastructure."
I have set before it should be marketed as a "startup incubator" and a place for services needed by the high-tech startup ecosystem. This doesn't mean you'd reject low-tech at all.
I wholeheartedly agree it must be in plain sight because trade is essential. A Gulch could produce its own copper wire, apples, etc, but it's much more efficient for people to produce the things they're really good at and trade for the rest.
If I make my own practice/business work and build significant wealth, I will support an effort like this by investing in it and serving on its board. By that point, I will know more about making business work. Hopefully some people who are already there can invest their money, time, and expertise in this.
I agree the concept is easy, but the devil will be in the details of international business law that will come up when the thing starts operating. These details are NOT a reason not to try but rather part of the unglamorous work of getting the Gulch going.
The whole idea of building something that lives up to our American ideals of liberty is a progressive idea. It would be progressive by its nature.
"Progressive" and "Conservative" in gov't threaten liberty. Unfortunately, liberty is not the natural state for human institutions, Liberty is like any ordered system, constantly requiring energy input to undo entropy.
I would go there for vacation, conferences, and investing.
As I said in another post, I think it's not a pipe dream. Done right, it could be a model that would force nations to question the idea of gov't being intrusive and a big chunk of GDP.
When you asked me to explain, I was tempted to just smart off with "Well, someone gave that comment a point."
I can clearly see the profit of resisting such stupid temptations.
An understanding between us would not have been gained if I had taken that tack.
Not resisting being stupid would have rendered me stupid.
See? Even dinos can evolve.
I'm not giving up on liberty in the US ever, so I would keep working with people such as President Obama who I think can help. I would like to see liberty issues become a question for debates. I would like the candidates to have answer "do we want to maintain the drug war, yes/no? Do we want to maintain an expensive standing army? Do we want to keep paying for people's retirement, medical care, disability insurance, etc? Do we want to keep sending a huge chunk of our earnings to the govt?" I would be happy just to see the questions asked, even if the answers were not my desired answers in favor of less intrusive/expensive gov't.
I want the Gulch / incubator / zona franca to be model raising these questions. "Consider the island community of Open Cay, which is technically part of the Bahamas but has almost no taxes. If it were a country, it would have the highest per capita GDP of any nation except for Qatar. Could Open Cay's policies help the US?" I want politicians to have to answer that!
I'm not giving up on liberty in the US ever, so I would keep working with people such as President Obama who I think can help.
That makes no sense whatsoever. Here we have a president who has done more (and is doing more) to erode our rights, freedoms, and has publicly stated he will do whatever it takes on these issues, and yet somehow you say he will help support liberty? That is 180 degrees, not just from reality, but from both his actions (with pen and cellphone to proclaim by fiat) and his own statements.
I remember when I was younger and easily swayed, I would ignore the facts before my face and support them, much as you say you are doing, but since I have gotten older, I can discern fact from fabrication. I'm NOT saying there aren't Dems who love our country and liberty as much as we do, but (and yes, I remember well the "W" era) with the candidates they keep putting up for office, well, they're doing more to destroy the fabric of our country than build it. And I'm not talking about the diversity issue - but maybe they ought to think about putting someone up for election that would support our constitution and our American values (going back to my immigrant forefathers) rather than people who publicly vow to tear it asunder.
They won't do it. We have to make them. I am concerned that the office of the presidency gets more powerful and the gov't gets more intrusive. My staying home or supporting some other candidate who would do the same thing is not the answer.
When a developer gets permits to build a subdivision,, permission, the scope of the work includes all the roads , flood controls and water reticulation parks, fire prevention ect within the development and then in addition a substantial fee paid to the city or county for expansion or upgrades to treatment plants , water wells , trash services and all the rest. Impact fee they are called, ransom is another way to look at them. I have paid fees for a city hortulacuist and a greenhouse to grow annuals to be planted in road medians. $600k for that one.
The city usually totally misuses these funds or spends many times more than a private sector builder would for the exact same thing, don’t even get me going on the DOT local state and fed, a black hole of waste and stupidity. Houston TX has a law that allows Municipal Utility Districts to be formed by the developer to provide all these systems and then charge the homeowners and business a small monthly fee to repay the costs and pay for continued maintenance and expenses. These feel are incredibly low as compared to a normal city. Trash pick up is just a few dollars a month compared to LA where I live now where it’s over $50 a month.
As Ronald Reagan told us over and over again Government can’t solve the problem, government is the problem. Please believe me the infrastructure costs are the easy part if the legal issues are resolved.
One city I lived in had an opportunity to build a solar plant on some indeveloped property that happened to be rated as one of the 10 most potentially productive hillsides in the nation for power - they could have formed a local utility, and the residents would have gotten cheap (and for the envirowhackos, green) power for the residents... not to mention it would have just looked *pretty*, like a glittering obsidian amphitheater, and would have brought the city fame for decades to come, and potentially spurred business development... OR... They could sell to a real estate developer, put ramshackle and substandard housing and McMansions on the property, and get not just all the permit and tax revenue from property sales, but the kickbacks as well *right now*... while the current city council was still in office.
Do you have to guess which way they went...
I agree that an Atlantis would have to be self sufficient and not dependent on the looters, and would also have to be isolated so the looters didnt TAKE what it had. Defense and self-sufficiency would be paramount. It would be not far from the scenario in "walking dead", if you substitute existing governments and looters for the "zombies".