Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

overcomingbias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 75 posts

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#31

Post by nickik »

Retric wrote: post #20
nickik wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These two things are very different and if you don't have any smart arguments then why post at all?

'are very different' How so? You are also making an argument, but I don't follow the reasoning.

Putting people into a house and stopping them from leaving the house is the same as 'detection, prosecution'.

Pretty sure there are pretty different people who handle these things.

And as the punishment proposed is about money, that is also incredibly different then 'stop people from leaving house'.

So, other then that the functionality is now with the government and that one proposes to privatize it. What do they have in common from a functional perspective?

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#32

Post by fao_ »

chasingthewind wrote: post #26

A lot of the snarky comments are getting downvoted but I must admit that my first reaction to reading even a few paragraphs of this article was essentially revulsion. I get that the rationalist community is really trying very hard to figure out novel ways to solve difficult problems and I am very supportive of that goal. I love reading Marginal Revolution for one, and I'm highly susceptible to the argument that there…

> A lot of the snarky comments are getting downvoted but I must admit that my first reaction to reading even a few paragraphs of this article was essentially revulsion.

I'm not sure to what degree describing one's first impressions honestly consists of snark.

> However private enterprise has so many unpredictable incentives that I simply would never want to subject myself to a system like this unless it had been proven to work for a long time someplace else (color me a private crime fighter NIMBY).

And even then, you would have to have a deep understanding, and be able to replicate the exact cultural quirks that allow such a system to "work" in the first place.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#33

Post by tboyd47 »

chasingthewind wrote: post #26

A lot of the snarky comments are getting downvoted but I must admit that my first reaction to reading even a few paragraphs of this article was essentially revulsion. I get that the rationalist community is really trying very hard to figure out novel ways to solve difficult problems and I am very supportive of that goal. I love reading Marginal Revolution for one, and I'm highly susceptible to the argument that there…

Yeah. I upvoted the story just because I thought the fact that it was such a spectacularly awful idea made it worthy of discussion. But when I saw the snarky comments all downvoted, I upvoted the snarky comments too.

You can only come up with truly innovative solutions to old problems once you've understood the history of the problems and reasons behind the old solutions. Otherwise you're just starting over again on the old problems while adding a few more problems of your own.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#34

Post by fao_ »

nickik wrote: post #13
atlantic wrote: post #10

> I propose to instead privatize the detection, prosecution, and punishment of crime. Yes, because privatization of the prison system worked out so well, didn't it? So let's go the whole hog and privatize the entire justice system.

These two things are very different and if you don't have any smart arguments then why post at all?

If the poster above you doesn't have any smart arguments, you don't have any arguments. A counter-argument is only a counter-argument through presenting an alternate (and supposedly-superior in some way) point of view. You haven't fleshed out anything, just posted a snarky comment on the internet.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#35

Post by tlb »

fao_ wrote: post #18
Avery3R wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or increased premiums, or torture, or whatever. I think the idea is if you don't like what the insurance company uses as a threat of punishment you can just sign a contract with a different one.

This assumes that someone has the time to read full-length legal documents and comprehend them. A task that is difficult for a lawyer, someone who is not only trained, but paid to do such things . It also assumes that the market wouldn't stablize around an equilibrium that is good for the market and the companies, but bad for the individual -- something that frequently happens with regards to loan companies.

For that matter, the current legal system assumes that you have time to read the criminal law.

Presumably, the insurance companies will be strongly motivated to teach their clients how to stay out of trouble.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#36

Post by 394549 »

ohazi wrote: post #28

This is a terrible idea on its own, but I find it particularly unpalatable because the author is deliberately tickling the fancy of all the "My theories are so beautiful and internally consistent" libertarians who wouldn't be able to identify a negative externality if it punched them in the nose. I've had this discussion a million times in college. It's always a dumpster fire.

> This is a terrible idea on its own, but I find it particularly unpalatable because the author is deliberately tickling the fancy of all the "My theories are so beautiful and internally consistent" libertarians who wouldn't be able to identify a negative externality if it punched them in the nose.

> I've had this discussion a million times in college. It's always a dumpster fire.

This, a thousand times. Simple theories can be beautiful, compelling, and wrong (both in the sense of correctness and morality). There's an vast minefield of "knowing just enough to be dangerous" between ignorance and wisdom, it seems like many fans of economics and its associated ideologies get stuck there.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#37

Post by fao_ »

tlb wrote: post #35
fao_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This assumes that someone has the time to read full-length legal documents and comprehend them. A task that is difficult for a lawyer, someone who is not only trained, but paid to do such things . It also assumes that the market wouldn't stablize around an equilibrium that is good for the market and the companies, but bad for the individual -- something that frequently happens with regards to loan companies.

For that matter, the current legal system assumes that you have time to read the criminal law. Presumably, the insurance companies will be strongly motivated to teach their clients how to stay out of trouble.

> Presumably, the insurance companies will be strongly motivated to teach their clients how to stay out of trouble.

Why? If your clients don't stay out of trouble, you get free indentured servants. It seems to me there is incentive to make it harder to stay within the confines of your contract.

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#38

Post by johndevor »

atlantic wrote: post #10

> I propose to instead privatize the detection, prosecution, and punishment of crime. Yes, because privatization of the prison system worked out so well, didn't it? So let's go the whole hog and privatize the entire justice system.

Isn't it the justice system that fills the prisons?

Re: Privately Enforced and Punished Crime

#39

Post by enord »

Karunamon wrote: post #14
bassman9000 wrote: post #5

Yet we still suffer from a great deal of police corruption and mistreatment, because government employees can coordinate well to create a blue wall of silence. So, to fix one minor problem, we're getting rid of equality before law, and paving the way for feudalistic corporations, getting one step closer to Snow Crash? No, thanks.

Equality before law doesn't exist right now. Being rich carries with it connections and enhanced representation that gets one out of many crimes scot free that would be life-ruining to you or me.

And replacing criminal proceedings with cash fines improves this how?
Post reply on HN