buff_geek

I appreciate all of you that are standing up for me, but I came here for a discussion about something I'm really interested in. So please, if you have any comments to make about me, send me an email. Don't muddy up this discussion.

Precisely. Moreover, it would attract folks that shared the underlying values that should form the foundations of whatever local statutes may be necessary to organize. There are examples in existence in the US today. The Amish. There is a Muslim community outside of Hancock NY that has been in existence for four (4) decades that I know of. There is an Orthodox Jewish community just North of the Jersey state line that is quite insular. The commonality amongst the ones that I cited is that there is a religious base to the community. There are also sanctuary cities in the US that flatly do not enforce certain Federal laws. Hillsdale College operates with no federal funds of any kind and is able to run it's college without repressive Federal interference. The precedents exist and it would be an excellent way to establish a real "point to" community to respond to the "it will never work" mantra of critics. Where do you live Steven? Adam The Hillsdale idea is great, but that just sounds like a regular private college. Does your comment mean that any group or company can be free of Federal interference just be refusing to take federal funding? A college is essentially just a collection of individualls and buildings, so can someone just make a compound somewhere, say it's a private dwelling, pay taxes on land, follow building/housing laws, not take federal/state funding and actually make an unincorporated town out of it? Maybe this would be easier than an incorporated one.

To get back to the original topic. We are trying to figure out how a city's legal system would have to be set up for it to exist as a Laissez Faire Capitalist city. Since we are familiar with it, we'll assume the home country is the U.S. That means we have federal, state and county laws that may interfere with city ones. In order to consider this, we have to think of ways a government's (especially a city government's) laws will affect a city's economy: Taxes. Choosing who gets taxed and how much. Choosing who gets tax breaks. Social Security? Welfare? Healthcare/Insurance: Legally required to buy something from private company. Minimum Wage? Land grabs. Taking land for public use then paying whatever compensation is deemed fair. Nationalizing any structure or product to secure for public use. Printing money. Physically determining how much money is out there. City level solutions: Voluntary "tax" system. Everyone pays what they deem necessary. They get what they pay for. City cannot use outside tax money (from federal or state level) to build roads and such. (Is this legal?) Social security/welfare/healthcare: Does a city have any involvement in this? Insurance (auto/home): The city does not legally require it. If you wreck you/someone elses car/house, you pay for it. If you can't figure out who owes what, the city helps you solve it. Minimum wage: Enforce federal and state wage requirements. Add no extra requirements. Land grab/nationalizing: The city cannot force any citizen/corporation to sell anything. It can only offer more money/trade (not favors). Having to pay more money for land and such makes a government really consider whether or not a project is necessary. A privately owned bank, located only in that city, coins money. (Is this legal?). This money can only be used in this city. (Legal?). No city businesses accept outside money. (Probably not legal). How do you prevent this money from leaving? If the outside money must be used and the city money can't be kept in the city, then this point is irrelevent. What are some other problems such a city might run into? In other words, legally, why can't such a city exist in the U.S. today?

No, you're talking about an Aristrocracy of Pull. The good ol' boy system. When you deal in favors you can never really be sure when you're solvent. The only reason Atlantis was self-sufficient was because it had to be. The rest of the country's infrastructure was falling apart. We don't want self sufficiency for the reasons Mikee listed. We couldn't have it anyway. No one city sized area has all the resources needed for a modern infrastructure.

I don't think Peter is being a good Objectivist with his insulting responses to my name and questions. Way to stifle an inquisitive mind! Anyway, I realize a small city community would not have its own sovereignty, but so what? Does it need it? Does a city government actually have to make laws that influence its economy in order to remain law abiding and in good standing with a state or federal government? I know it would be tricky running a city like this. It would have to enforce state/federal laws that may affect its economy, while at the same time enforcing its own laws against affecting its economy. It is a fine line to walk, but it's a lot easier than trying to change the whole U.S. to Laissez Faire Capitalism.

Well it would definately have to be an incorporated town then. Capable of making and enforcing its own laws. I like how Rand described it. The land is owned by one person and then sold piece by piece to others. Preferably, the town hall land is the first to be purchased and a town hall is built before any other homes/shops are set up. I don't like the idea of the covenant as you described it. A town should not exist on the agreement of its members. It should be held together by laws. Now, of course it should not exist against the will of the people. I think the best way to ensure that is to have a voluntary "tax" system. But, as an experiment, it may not be best to mix too many variables. Making it a laissez faire capitalist and voluntary "tax" community all at once may be too complex to start. I am not convinced the U.S. would be the best place to start such a community. We are becoming increasingly fascist. Is it even legal for a town to be laissez faire or have the voluntary "tax" system in the U.S.? I was introduced to Ayn Rand through Atlas Shrugged. I read it for a scholarship. I then became familiar with Objectivism and found that no one locally cared about it. So here I am.

Do you think it is possible to build a real version of Atlantis somewhere in the world today? Maybe not a completely self-sufficient community, but at least a town with a small, limited government and a legal separation of economy and state and church and state.