Can anyone here refute my ancap friend?

So? Will a free for all of private military companies struggling to acquire control over resources be any better? How would the most successful companies which subjugate the largest amount of workers and resources be any different from states?

we started from an ancap position
your government is just the most successful company, now pay rent ("tax") on the companies land, and the capabilities it provides you, or get in the sea.

your parents implicitly agreed to this clause when they had gave birth to you into the free baby market.

And he doesn't grasp that in previous times - or much of the world even now - that latter fact would have made him an undesirable worthy of death or forced conversion "therapy"?

...

Disgusted reaction image

WHAT THE FUCK

Tell them that capitalists don't pay for anything. Mathematically they don't contribute to production at all. When they invest capital into an enterprise, the workers use that capital to produce produces which creates profit, which then reimburses the capitalist for their investment. Essentially the workers pay the capitalist back for their capital with the profits created by their labour. However despite this, the capitalist continues to maintain ownership of the enterprise and extract wealth from it despite the fact that his contribution has been returned to him. He is literally getting something for nothing.

Capitalism is the least efficient system

Did you do lewd things yet?

"I don't think I deserve anything I didn't pay for."

Except in our current form of society we have agreed that you did pay for those things and you paid for them through the collective mutual fund of taxes. The idea of "taxes" and "theft" in a legal and economic sense are decided socially not by pocket ideologues who distort easy to understand words for ideological reasons.

"Of course everyone should get to decide where they spend their money on. I don't care if it goes to the "whole community", I don't care about the whole community. I care about what I care about, and I want to pay only for what I care about."

People tend to make dumb short sighted decisions of their own accord and it's not always because they're dumb or short sighted in their intellect. Immediate concerns in a capitalist society often take precedent whether your a day laborer or CEO of a large company. That is the unfortunate nature of capitalism it prizes short term opportunism and desperation over long term planning and sustainable living.

Imagine I'm a twenty year old construction worker in an ancap society who thinks my life on the job is great and that I'll be doing it for the rest of my life. Now lets jump to me being a 60 year old construction worker, for whatever reason I never made foremen I never got an office job and I'm still out there bending my back in the hot sun doing roofing. The guys come up to me one day and say "we love you x and damn you've done a lot for this company but your putting yourself and our companies liability at risk by being up there each day… We have to let you go."

Now I'm a sixty year old construction worker with no other skills who consistently made good short term decisions but never managed to save up anything because medical costs, food, clothes and other expenses ate my non-union ancap construction job money away.

Now imagine we come back to reality for a second and at the very fucking least I have my social security pension fund to fall back on. Society recognized a problem of old people being out of jobs they thought they'd have forever and from the viewpoint of being young vibrant members of society was true at the time they started their careers, then slowly life crept up on them and they found themselves at an unemployable age with no relief in sight. The administering of social security as a mandatory account made the great recession a lot less harmful than the great depression because at least old people had enough relief to not have to go compete with the downscale jobs everyone else was facing which is how we avoided a lot of job lines and full on bank runs this time around. By downscale i mean most people moving down a bracket in the job hierarchy after the recession like Twenty year olds having to compete with middle age people for service jobs they usually wouldn't be taking in easier economic times. Without social security there also would have been 80 year olds in that line trying to get fast food jobs.

We benefit everyday from things like this and society not further dipping down into the toilet but the long term negatives aren't as easy to imagine as the immediate short term positives of stupid tax breaks and a cut in social services.

I don't know why but this made me chuckle.

He is a walking, bourgeoise meme.
This is the garbage he just posted on his Facebook account:
"This is the true ideal of socialism, despicable!
"When the best among us step DOWN, our nation will PERISH a little more"
In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win.
In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.
There is no morality whatsoever in sacrificing your best for anything less."

A good friend of mine thinks he looks like he enjoys black cock too much.

He lives in Belgium, I live in Canada.
I would love to fuck him.
I don't think he wants to bottom for anyone.

This is true in a sense. Government and corporations merged, but the merger was already quasi-symbiotic because large companies can only exist in the shade of a state with a military large enough to enforce neoliberal practices on other countries with less developed markets and resources we need to sustain the economy at home. Without that large military those other countries would tell 1st world nations to go fuck themselves while they do the smart thing and use protectionism to trade raw resources while developing their internal industries enough that they can compete in a global setting like most countries did in non mythical capitalist history.

This also means though that ancaps cant claim that their form of capitalism would be "as good it is today" and blanket claim the beneficial aspects of modern society because their stateless capitalism would not be strong enough to muscle resources and open markets up for exploitation. Not to mention the hypocrisy of "crony, mixed-economy, statism, etc."

Well I really don't know what this question means without more context but…

Lets imagine for a second I give you two options for health insurance, one is a large government run insurance company that pools everyone's money together and seamlessly adds the funds to your pre-existing social security account. They have a large booming voice so they can negotiate prices down easier on drugs and medical costs and they have every incentive to do so because campaign promises usually have social benefit cost cutting while increasing the value of service in a visible way to keep enticing voters to vote for you.

Now lets imagine I tell you we will instead use "private" insurance. Private mostly in name only as they get to do most of the things banks do which means they're subject to tons of federal subsidies and bypases that they do. They also get a lot of bailouts because they tend to be reckless spenders in constantly trying to expand the scope of their business. Their pool of money is less powerful in the sense that it is divided up a bunch of mid sized conglomerate companies and is inefficiently distributed among customers who often have to beg for basic services or to get someone on the fucking phone to ask questions about their policies. Instead of using their large power to cut down the costs of medicine and medical services they tend to make deals with pharmaceutical companies and some shitty healthcare professionals to jack up prices on both ends so they can mutually rip each other off at your expense. At the end of all this they have no incentive to even pay out on your health expenses or make your health care any better as a service as that isn't their end of the business. Their main incentive is to increase their bottom line which turns them into literal, rather than figurative "death panels," where they will deny long paying customers who develop cancer and call it a pre-existing condition. They also will shed their responsibility in the case of large epidemics or area wide medical crises in which case the government comes in and pays anyway.

Privatization in this instance leads to an unnecessary middle man who is more of an obstacle to your goal of getting health care than something useful and I'll touched the tip of the iceberg on reasons why this ends up being the case. This also ends up being the case when government has ended up privatizing aspects of the military in recent years and utilities like power and water distributors. Flint Michigan still has no clean water, but they can sure taste the lead content based freedom.

I don't even get what he is trying to say with this. My basic bitch insights end here I guess.

ancaps don't deserve to be engaged in good faith. Either ignore them or armbar them

Tell him to give his life back to his parents.

No need for hypotheticals. America has the most expensive healthcare in the world, by any metric you care to name (% of GDP, absolute cost for procedures, PPP adjustment).

Well my "hypothetical" was disingenuous in the sense in that I was describing the US insurance situation.

I hate to break this to you, but most of the people with actual power just take things without paying for them, they could care less about who deserves what.