Comment: Three Points

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Predictions, predictions (see in situ)

Three Points

1. I suggest reading the blog post that I linked to earlier. It addresses many of the points you're raising. It would save us time and effort.

2. I'm not saying it has to be one DRO stronger than the rest. It might be three DROs stronger than the other two, or five stronger than the other seven, makes no difference at all. The point is, the strongest DRO, or partnership of DROs, wins the dispute - who wins the dispute is not decided by prices or other economic factors, it's about whose armed goons can enforce their employer's ruling despite the resistance of the other company's armed goons. And, ultimately, the strongest DRO will get a monopoly (or the strongest partnership of DROs will get a cartel).

3. As to violence being expensive, that's true. But saying a DRO won't use violence because its expensive is wrong, it's like saying Blackwater won't use violence because it's expensive - they're in a violent business. The dispute resolution business is inherently violent. Providing the service requires the use of violence. How does one enforce a ruling against someone who doesn't want to accept it without using violence? ...A violent DRO is not a power-hungry or evil DRO, it's just a DRO. All DROs must be violent to some extent.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."