Comments on: Because They Can, Wingtip Edition http://c4ss.org/content/614 building awareness of the market anarchist alternative Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:43:41 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Michael Bindner http://c4ss.org/content/614/comment-page-1#comment-527 Michael Bindner Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:54:34 +0000 http://c4ss.org/?p=614#comment-527 The same approach PML identified could be, and I suspect is, used where prostitution is officially tolerated in Europe. The same approach would work here in a manner much more efficient than the current regulation of vice. Speaking of vice, such an approach would also work better in the regulation of cannabis sales. The same approach PML identified could be, and I suspect is, used where prostitution is officially tolerated in Europe. The same approach would work here in a manner much more efficient than the current regulation of vice. Speaking of vice, such an approach would also work better in the regulation of cannabis sales.

]]> By: P.M.Lawrence http://c4ss.org/content/614/comment-page-1#comment-513 P.M.Lawrence Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:14:29 +0000 http://c4ss.org/?p=614#comment-513 Perhaps surprisingly, there <I>is</I> a public interest in licensing bootblacks, the same one as in licensing taxis, which is why when it was introduced in 19th century London the same licensing authority handled both which otherwise don't seem to belong together. That interest is, keeping opportunistic muggers out of those trades. Quite often, since they couldn't easily be identified, practitioners would mug customers if they were easy prey. A <I>proper</I> licensing system favoured "good bacteria" driving out "bad bacteria" with a self policing approach. Licensed practitioners were in the places where they could spot and turn in the others, which they did to protect their valuable privilege, and they themselves couldn't get away with mugging because they could be tracked down by their highly visible licences. London taxi drivers have a flourishing trade association complete with trade paper and support facilities all around the town (repair yards and dumps, trade cafes, etc.), all working for the "good bacteria". This is the old mediaeval approach of having privileges in exchange for public functions, and the added cost to the public is actually buying something - a true fair market. The modern approach has taxes to fund distinct policing that looks fairer to the modern mind than privileges - but it's inefficient in cases like this, where there is an added overhead from setting up a distinct policing presence that self policing doesn't incur (that is, the self policers have the overhead of a presence anyway, to carry on their trade). The problems today don't stem from a lack of a sound reason for licensing but from the authorities losing the plot and not doing things properly but instead for revenue while trying - bureaucratically, wastefully and harmfully - to police those trades themselves. There is a sound kernel in there, heavily trampled down. It makes a change for me to bring this out from the bootblacks' point of view rather than the taxi drivers'. Perhaps surprisingly, there is a public interest in licensing bootblacks, the same one as in licensing taxis, which is why when it was introduced in 19th century London the same licensing authority handled both which otherwise don’t seem to belong together.

That interest is, keeping opportunistic muggers out of those trades. Quite often, since they couldn’t easily be identified, practitioners would mug customers if they were easy prey. A proper licensing system favoured “good bacteria” driving out “bad bacteria” with a self policing approach. Licensed practitioners were in the places where they could spot and turn in the others, which they did to protect their valuable privilege, and they themselves couldn’t get away with mugging because they could be tracked down by their highly visible licences. London taxi drivers have a flourishing trade association complete with trade paper and support facilities all around the town (repair yards and dumps, trade cafes, etc.), all working for the “good bacteria”.

This is the old mediaeval approach of having privileges in exchange for public functions, and the added cost to the public is actually buying something – a true fair market. The modern approach has taxes to fund distinct policing that looks fairer to the modern mind than privileges – but it’s inefficient in cases like this, where there is an added overhead from setting up a distinct policing presence that self policing doesn’t incur (that is, the self policers have the overhead of a presence anyway, to carry on their trade).

The problems today don’t stem from a lack of a sound reason for licensing but from the authorities losing the plot and not doing things properly but instead for revenue while trying – bureaucratically, wastefully and harmfully – to police those trades themselves. There is a sound kernel in there, heavily trampled down.

It makes a change for me to bring this out from the bootblacks’ point of view rather than the taxi drivers’.

]]> By: Less Antman http://c4ss.org/content/614/comment-page-1#comment-511 Less Antman Sat, 06 Jun 2009 02:15:40 +0000 http://c4ss.org/?p=614#comment-511 What a story, and I was delighted to see the happy ending that resulted from the actions of a large number of private individuals the very next day: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/05/MNVJ1817N1.DTL Keep shining a light on these power trips. All part of the legitimization process. What a story, and I was delighted to see the happy ending that resulted from the actions of a large number of private individuals the very next day:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/05/MNVJ1817N1.DTL

Keep shining a light on these power trips. All part of the legitimization process.

]]>