gray i was first i came here with no likes no dislikes no views im gonna be the first person to ever like this vid, but there is 7 comments...

“Best government ever👏👏👏”

!

0:55 I lnow you'll never read this but you could have put it's free real estate there, maybe next time?

Everyone has to have a pot of coffee a day or they die

more like California

Joe Figueroa Cali and FL are the first and fourth highest GDP states in America

More like Miami

As a Citizen of Florida. Our laws are more like guidelines.

Isabel Kyle no he created Miami.

Long as they make money from it, they don't care xD

😍

Rob Fowler ?

Athena Wild ummm you’re pretty?

Rob Fowler oh, thank you☺️

The last criminal to openly try met a Glock 18. And was squeegeed off the pavement.

There's also private security. You know, guys that want to protect your family and don't care how fast you drive because there's no ticketing incentive?

​@@TheAttacker732 Based AF

yesss

@eyan sorad nah

@eyan sorad *BIOSHOCK INTENSIFIES*

@eyan sorad as it should be. And anyone who believes otherwise is weak. And no I’m being 100% genuine and earnest. Only children and pets are loved unconditionally (and then only by their parents & family). Why should we give time to anyone who isn’t

@eyan sorad *M I N A R C H I S T !!!*

For the rich and influential it sure is; for the ones who don't have much they are subject to every whim of those in power. There is a reason the rich want less and less power for the government because if it doesn't have any, the money the rich have will buy them power and influence from the power vacuum. This also holds true in our societies with governments.

Not necesarily Maximilian Kuhn, because the goverment, is so small and limited, there is no way the rich can influence and put laws that benefit and outlaw or limit competition, so they have to compete. Also because the mayority of work is private, the private companies have to compete for the workers, these increase salaries and benefice. Also these means that because the law can be private and the state run very limited wealthfare, you are responsable for your decicion, so you have to take a good decicion, and take a career that make you to the workforce inmidiatly, as education is private, the best education, and more merits, also because the the laws are so minimals and basics, it is very dificult that companies become the corporations of today that can influence the goverment to the point they can do wathever. Finaly because the police is private, or finance by private entities, these mean police officers are well pay and they feel the incentive to actualy do their jobs. Also with no wealthfare and limited goverment, there is no bloat and because the state is minimal, there is no bloat and no necesity to raise taxes, so mayority of winnings go to the people, these means, the companies and industries, have to compete for the workers means, better benefits and better salaries, no doubt there will be abuse, but because there is jobs for everione, you dont like the job, you leave somewhere that pays better. Finaly, because nearly all services are private, run there is very few posibilities of the state hires workersjust for put because friends or family, wich avoidthe bloat

@@paradoxalJohn Your first point is the luddite fallacy. People will find ways to make money, with or without automation. I don't how a "poor" family would struggle if jobs were more common and the prices of goods and services being low due to competition. This premise relies on things being expensive in a stateless society, which isn't true. The environment would be better of privatized as individuals have a better incentive to preserve it for profit and recreation. Most pollutions are caused by governments or organizations in bed with the government. Take the Soviet Union for example.

Try living in it.

@@paradoxalJohn that would be cool

Birki gts Nestle would love this

You destroy your own water, and then make a business out of importing water. Your own water has no capitalistic gains.

He found out the hard way that water does have capitalistic gains. Beaches, swimming pools, boating, etc.

Nestle be like

He said after his first good moneymaking building was a beach

As it should be.

AMERICA!

You're damn right. 20-25% of your own dollars doesn't seem like much being taken from you per check, but add that tax rate to every working American and then realize how much money the government takes AND without transparency, how do you REALLY know where your money is going? We let the government tax us more and more like they aren't corrupted like, comon people... don't trust the government, trust yourself. Build a culture that teaches people how to pay for their own healthcare, their own retirement, their own police and fire department, their own highways, their own schools, NOT a culture that just RELIES on the government taking your money to do it for you. Desperate people do desperate things, and to survive without help? Well, they'll find a way in an anarcho-capitalist society.

"Just a couple people that totally got off, bro." -Dennis Reynolds

Coffee Sploosh totally agreed federal government is needed but should stay out of the way as long as capitalism is being preserved within the markets. We pay way too much into the fed through taxes, I hate these people who claim lowering taxes hurts the lower classes because “trickle down” doesn’t work. Trickle down is a strawman created to refute Raegan esque tax policies. But its proven lower taxes improves the pockets of american citizens, its funny when people say otherwise. Anyways good comment!

@@gamingsaint6238 Thanks for the reply. I got into school for 20 weeks and racked up over 6k in debt. Ridiculous. I started my own business and didn't even need 6 grand to see a profit. Give us more choice, give us choices where our taxes go where the individual as a collective decide what's most important in our communities and country.

@@spaulding304 THANK YOU

The Lintnerd :))

We do😂😂

@@kasedunn3895 I know we do.

Yeet

The AnCap army will rise

I see that as a solution, not a problem

On the upside, they also need less money. If you provide almost no services, you need almost no money to pay for them. About the only thing you have to provide is basic infrastructure and with just a little bit of sales tax you can pay for those easily enough. This wouldn't be hard to do IRL to be honest (harder than the game, but not by much).

Anarchy means no government.. exactly which government is profiting?? Lol

well, anarchy is about no government, so there is no "government making money". And I am pretty sure, with such system, there will definitely be having some super rich monopolies but poverty will be like 80% of the population.

@@1090Ideas Ah ok that makes more sense lol

Same applies to lower class

It also makes the status of upper class accessible by the lower class.

yes, I keep coming back to watch this over and over again, because while this is not a completely accurate simulation, it does give me the warm fuzzies, free-market wise at least 😄

@@hyperlanceitex6149 accuracy of name employee in building: loli as a lolita the is a from russian people

You know anarchy is anarchy. The only thing that separates anacho communism and anacho capitalism is voluntarism.

@@sujaykrishnanath82 anarcho communism doesn't exist and is a contradicting ideology.

@@sujaykrishnanath82 You can't have anarchistic communism. Communism goes against human nature, you need to force the people into it. Anarchy is the lack of governmental control, so communism can't exist in an anarchy.

Yeah but with like freedom And coffee 👌

@@thenlnlkn But it ended up a libertarian oligarchy so I think they lost their freedom when private entities could own their own police. Freedom out the window

@@eagle3676 now the police are either private armies or security guards

i live in dubai and laws here haunt you at midnight

@@Aadvait lol

When the happiest good ending is hidden behind the Evil route (The intent to create the most chaotic lawless society ended up producing one of the free-est most prosperous society of all)

Is the game any good? I like games in this genre.

I see this as an absolute win

Government should have as little power as possible.

@@frankcastle4715 government shouldn't even exist!

That's no problem

@@bitzelijoschaevci3444 careful what you wish for. The government is a pain until you need it.

@@bitzelijoschaevci3444 it should

Now THAT'S a great joke

True

And you can't spell Slaughter without Laughter.

That works on *1* level

this didn’t work and i’m sad.

The apple never falls too far from the tree huh.

More specifically he created Orlando. A city of nothing but high rises, hotels, beaches, and amusement parks you had to devastated the local wetlands to build.

Sounds like Los Santos

Where are the alligators

u right :O

It's been done already. Futuristic Violence and Fancy Suits. It's not a bad book but it's hard to get into at first because of the main character.

@@PenTheMighty Why?

In the novel, an nihilistic liberal decides to screw over the world by starting a anarcho-capitalist state expecting it to fail but his plans backfires and he inadvertently creates a utopian society.

Probably what would happen in real life, too

like it always has

Wish humanity was like! We all can’t agree on anything.

@Firelord Eliteast67 yeah, what you all aren't realizing is that, in this simulation, it's just the rich exploiting the poor without limits.

@Cradle of Chaos “yeah, what you all aren't realizing is that, in this simulation, it's just the rich exploiting the poor without limits.“ This is based on…?

@@cradleofchaos4923 na it seems more like, that there is a trickle down effect, that unlike in the real world works.

That's a good thing

Our only weakness

Ancaps: Tolls for everyone! You pay a toll! You pay a toll! Everyone pays a toll! Except that guy in the helicopter. He pays landing fees.

A soon to be richer Ancap: "I'll pay to fix the roads between my business partners so we can trade more easily, and enjoy going to see each other more. I'll also do it to make trucking and logistics easier so the cash flows more freely"

See photos of American cities before the income tax....

11:51

My favorite quote of 2019 I’d love for this to be used in the real world

That line could very well be in a movie. Brilliant!

He has my vote next election

Phantomsinferno CAPITALISM RULES

the joker doesnt know the first thing about anarchy.

@Antiope4 Anarchy in the non-political sense does mean total chaos, lawlessness. But for this video, it's about anarchy as a political system.

@@Shijaru64 Anarchy will always end up in turbo capitalism

@@frodehp43 Totally agreed.

Yes, the Joker is the god of the new world, he shall make the new Soviet Army.

As it should be.

Based af

The less interference that exists the faster things improve only bad thing is exploitation improves too

Government is good at three things, Stealing your money, Taking away your liberty, And killing people. They suck ass at everything else.

@@errorcringyname4044 Government is exploitation

@@jamesdean4836 Well done

Free market always lead to oligarchy and wealth inequality

Dead Im dead Anarcho-capitalists are not real anarchists

@@Protomanbeawsome correct they are not.

@@Protomanbeawsome they're anarcho-capitalists lol

Dead Im dead well at least we know, an caps are weird folks

Anarcho-capitalists are not even people

No he made florida

@@sparecreeper1580 florida metropolis from halo then

11:50

Ancaps: The -worst- best part about anarchy is that there's no way for the -government- tyrant's institution to -make- steal any money

@@Adri9570 that sounds more accurate.

@@Adri9570 so without government who would protect you from enemy army’s

​@@darklord7479 privatized defense

Is great.

anarchy good

The Shitstorm Starter The government wouldn’t exist

The best would be libertarian because it has a free market but it still has funds to maintain rights because of course we can’t have no laws

Gray created anarchy goddammit

Seems normal to me.

As a dev myself I love seeing people play my games in ways I’ve never thought of

He's not really doing anything particularly crazy. The game just seems to be really easy.

He wasn't doing anything nearly as game breaking in this one as he does in other games. Gray is actually the best kind of tester for developers. The first thing I was taught by the person teaching me game design was: Try to think of every way a player can break your game, and how to stop them from doing it. You can never think of everything though, and people do strange things. Gray shows you just how he can break a game. He has a natural talent for it.

Silicon Valley is mostly Libertarian, despite our reputation. Conservatives hear we don't care about gay marriage, transgendered people and we're mostly atheists - therefore we must be liberuls. This game is showing the bias of the coders.

Maybe it's an oligarchy because all the population are high class

To be fair every democracy is an oligarchy because large corporations run the government

@@whiteduck5563 True, at least are current representative democracies are run by politicians and their wealthy friends

@@whiteduck5563 I mean, yes.

I thought this was weird because how can there be an oligarchy without a government? It just sounds like an insanely wealthy and prosperous society

Nah man, i kinda like my liver

shut the up

😂😂😂

You gonna be drunk AF!

@@FBI-real shut the up

That's why everyone prospers!

"problem"

There's literally no government though.

@@RP-qe8mv lmfao did you really just use Switzerland to prove a point about government involvement? You mean one of the "European paradises" that give a plethora of free social programs to their citizens like college and healthcare? The truth is that human success isn't primarily predicated on government vs private involvement. It's mostly based on competence and trust. A system that is run fairly and without corruption is the best option. It's a fact that corruption can happen in both government and in private industry to absolute absurd degrees. So it's kind of just fundamental human nature that's holding us back from a real paradise, not some silly ideologies about "big vs small govt".

What he did is he owned public places and had fees they paid that way

This statement brings me great amusement and joy.

Not really. This game was made by a classical liberal who follows *PragerU* of all things. I'm not going to take a video game as a model on how to run society, lol.

@@matthewlinus4691 Now that's a hilarious thing to learn five seconds after learning this game exists.

@@matthewlinus4691 its a game dude, chill, this is like saying that the sims is bad simulator, because it allows you to kill your sims

Me :

Just take away any required permits or background checks and you're all set

@@dusty2080 That's what Uber was before they got sued.

@@Briskrainbow0 Oh yeah, was that the thing related to kidnapping/assault?

@@dusty2080 Yup. Several cases of sexual assaults/kidnappings happened with Uber drivers taking home drunk or just simply lone women at night. In my opinion, it is like everyone forgot the reason why Taxi Drivers had a lot of regulations and licensing.

@@Briskrainbow0 That idea was backwards to begin with. Hitchhiking has had a bad reputation for being risky for decades, and for good reason. But getting into an unlicensed cab is effectively the same thing; only you get to pay for the privilege of being in danger.

@Tyler Reese I agree that anarchy means 'no rulers.' Another way of saying that is 'no government,' or perhaps a better way to say that is 'no state,' but we tend to use the terms 'the state' and 'the government' interchangeably. Money is necessary for any economy with divisions of labor and divisions of labor are necessary for any economy to progress beyond a mere 'cave-man-like' economy. Depends on what you mean by equality. Equality of opportunity is a laudable goal that is nearly achieved (though the progressives are fighting hard to against it.) Equality of outcome is an idiotic idea that cannot be achieved in a society more advanced than a 'cave-man-like' society ... and even in a cave-man-like society it's not really possible, it's just that the differences between become minimal.

@Tyler Reese First of all, I said _laudable_ NOT _laughable._ I agree the 'the government' and 'the state' are not the same thing. They are, however, used interchangably in our society, which is what I said. The government is the apparatus. The state is the people who control that apparatus. At least that's how it was explained to me. There's so much wrong with your second paragraph, I don't even know where to begin. First of all, 'money' is not the worthless pieces of paper we are now forced to use. 'Money' is simply a common commodity that is widely accepted which can be used as a means of exchange. The alternative to money is barter and barter CANNOT support a complex economy. If being a doctor and being a ditch digger both paid exactly the same we'd have allot fewer doctors. A main problem with the utopian type societies like what you describe is the problem of incentives. We have TVs and cars and cell phones and cargo ships and so forth because someone invented them in an effort to make a profit. Without that incentive, who would take all the risks necessary to invent new products? Russia had exactly this problem. There's a sickness going around our society right now which is the idea that rich people are rich because they're evil. No doubt some of them are, and no doubt, some of them use their riches in nefarious ways, but rich people get rich in the first place because they offer something to society that society wants, something that improves society. You say 'they need us, we don't need them' and you're right as long as you don't mind giving up cars, computers, grocery stores, and all the other things they invented/produced/etc. I've started a business. I sacrificed to save up money then risked that money to start up a business. Then I hire someone to help out and your argument is that I should give them the same wages I make myself? Why? What did they sacrifice? What did they risk? Think it through, if my employees got an equal share of everything, why would I sacrifice to save and then risk that money in the first place? The very first economy set up by European settlers in the new world was a communist economy. No one had any incentive to work. Consequently, 90% of them died the first winter because they had no stores of food, no stores of firewood, etc. There are 500 settlers and my job is to chop firewood. Because I have to share equally with everyone, for every 1000 pieces of wood I chop, I get to keep 2. How much wood am I going to chop? Not much. The second governor of that colony changed it over to a capitalist economy and it thrived from then on. The last thing I want to point out is that anarcho-communism (or anarcho-socialism) is an oxymoron. Whose going to force a school to take someone who can't afford to pay the tuition? All forms of socialism (like communism) require a totalitarian form of government to force people to give up (share equally) whatever they've produced. The only fair way is to let each one benefit from their own labors. This means those who work hard will have more than those who don't, and thus there will be people in different economic tiers (or classes if you prefer.) Those who produce/invent something that society wants they are rewarded, incentivizing others to produce/invent. When you don't benefit from your own labor, you have no incentive to labor.

@@Lord_Volkner Cool comment, I agree with you. But why anarcho-communism is not possible? There can be a anarcho-communism commune without government where people would enter voluntary. They would just kick out of that commune by its members if they don't agree with the rules. Despite I don't like communism and prefer capitalism as well, I think there are people for whom it is suitable. You're right about the problem of incentives, but I think there are people who can work productively in socialism society too.

@@danilpopkov8211 There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? One of the major fallacies of all forms of socialism is it's fundamental assumption that people are all equal; we're not. Some people are deligent, some of not, some are hard working, some are lazy, some are clever, some are dim-witted and so on. Let's imagine a socialist society for a moment. The hard-working people get paid the same as the lazy people. Before long, the hard working people are going to pack up and leave. Now we just lost the productive members in society. The only way to prevent this is to prevent them from leaving. There are two ways to do that: provide incentives (pay them more) or compulsion (force them to stay.) If we take the first route, that is, if we pay each one according to how much value they add then we're no longer a socialist society; we're back to capitalism. If we take the second route, we need an authoritarian state to force them to stay. But let us imagine that we force them to stay, what incentive do they have to keep working hard? Again, we're back to incentives or compulsion. One is the antithesis of socialism and the other is authoritarianism. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron. But now let us take the route you refered to, getting rid of anyone who doesn't measure up. Now we're Stalin with slave labor camps (or gulags as they were called in Russia,) or Hitler with concentration camps or Mao with death camps. And who gets to decide who measures up and who doesn't? Well, you have to have a centralized authority for that, which is the exact opposite of anarchy. Socialism requires an authoritarian/totalitarian centralized body (state) to function. Thus anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron. For a good look into how these things actually worked in the real world, I highly recommend _The Gulag Archipelago_ by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. You can find a free audio version of Vol 1 here: archive.org/details/TheGulagArchipelago Vol 2 here: archive.org/details/107GulagVolTwo and Vol 3 here: archive.org/details/103GulagVolThree

@@Lord_Volkner "There are people who 'can' work productively in a socialist society, but what incentive do they have to do so? " maybe respect, glory, curiousity(in case of inventions), whatever. I actually don't care about that, just wanted to mention that there are some people who are not motivated by money only, so if we actually had the freedom of association, I think it is possible that a couple of such communes would arise. In addition to that, there could be cooperative forms of business, where intial capital is provided equally by all of the workers and all of them have equal responsibility. As far as I know, there are forms of socialism which don't suppose having the strong government.

Me: i hear a nuke comeing WAIT I SEE A NUKE COMEING AHHHHHHHH RUN RUN AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

No matter the confusion, as a civilian you're fucked ...

@@Spongebob0911 I mean, civilians would have the power. I think that's the exact opposite of what you're imagining.

gold-and-black-anarchy Anarchy is inherently left wing. Abolishing the state compatible with left wing values. More government doesn’t equal left wing. Ronald Reagan massively increased the state in most respects (military, war on drugs,etc.) and he definitely wasn’t on the left. Anarchy can not be capitalist or right wing because capitalism and right wing politics are about establishing hierarchies and it creates inequality. Left wing politics are about dismantling hierarchies and increasing equality. Communism is a moneyless, classless and yes STATELESS economic system. Capitalism is the definition of an unnecessary hierarchy and anarchy is inherently opposed to unnecessary hierarchies. Under so-called “capitalist anarchy” the most powerful corporations would effectively become the new state and therefore it can not be anarchist by definition. Being an anarchist (among other things) means opposing capitalism and the state simultaneously. Socialism (worker ownership of the means of production) and Communism (I already defined this) are meant to dismantle hierarchies, at least ideally, and are completely compatible with anarchism. And yes some self proclaimed communist countries had states (the USSR, Mao’s China) however, not all types of communism are completely anarchist (such as Marxism-Leninism) and the state is supposed to wither away by the time those societies transition to full communism, which would probably take decades, also those states tend to become corrupt and turn away from communism back to capitalism (China is the perfect example of this.) Anarchy can not be right wing by definition. Also capitalism is what really enslaves people and steals from them. If you don’t work under a capitalist system you won’t have money to buy food and you starve. This coercion is effectively slavery. Also in the third world it’s not at all uncommon for people to be literally enslaved at gunpoint, such as cobalt mining in the Congo. Capitalist anarchism, also known as fake anarchism only opposes the government and allows corporations to become an even worse government simply because it doesn’t call itself the government. And it will be worse because corporations make money of exploiting people so they have a financial incentive to make things worse. True anarchism opposes all unjustified hierarchies and no matter what, whether it’s capitalism, the state, or anything else. That is all.

gold-and-black-anarchy Maybe you should read it, everything in my comment is correct. Also I don’t support the Democratic Party, I’m not even American, and the Democratic Party definitely isn’t anarchist, so I have no idea why you brought it up like it’s a response to what I wrote. Anarchy opposes unjust hierarchies, such as capitalism and the state alike. I’m not trying to pull the wool over your eyes by secretly shilling for the state, I have no reason to do that. Also I don’t plan on dying anytime soon, so the world will have to deal with my correctly explaining anarchy for at least a little while longer.

Jean-Luc La Rue You ever hear of a little thing called “anarcho-capitalism”? It’s socially anarchist and economically, free markets rule. 0 government intervention. It’s beautiful.

I watched this video because of Tim.

same here

@@gsgunawan80 may i ask which video was it?

@@mizuki4002 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jdKAg6ZytuCxg3U.html

They "happen" according to how the game programmers have decided that they will "happen". This is NOT REAL LIFE.

Anthony Davis calm ya tits. It is real life.

Anthony Davis not really the less regulated private property is and the less amount of taxes are charged the more successful the country is

@@andrespinilla8611 No its not thats lies the rich tell the poor so the poor accept horrible conditions and don't complain

@@pimp963 why do the poor need to rely on government? can't they take responsibility for themselves

Also gets lower class support

+Skyler's Animations don't wanna be homeless? either get a job or don't gamble your house away in the first place. no government intervention required.

@@voltagedrop5899 ahh I wish i was as young and naive as you :')

people who say lmbo instead of lmao are big gae

@@piggi5xtheawesome973 Actually I doubt their sexual orientation is determined by their level of swearing

Me lol

Which episode was this?

I heard about this on timcast and immediately thought "I wonder if gray played that game" then I find out "oh he was talking about gray specifically"

@@thebigkbear9881 same! This popped into my feed the day after i watched that episode of Tim's podcast.

Nice profile picture

I don't know why you think they wouldn't approve as well. Everyone like lower taxes. Most poorer people still have at least a car, and I'm sure they'd love to pay less on it as well.

Can't disapprove if there is no lower class 🤷‍♂️

Liz Price This comment was poking fun at some of the logic fails of this game

Lower Class: what car??

Josny13 Since you failed to realize and/or read the reply to “Liz Price”.. This comment was poking fun at some of the “logic fails” and the fact that people find it funny that the upper class approves

The fact this was so successful was so beautiful lol

I was looking to see who else watches Tim lol. I saw the title and thought "Was he talking about Gray here? Cause this looks exactly like what Tim mentioned."

Aye me too!

Wait, he did? Which video did he mention it in?

Yeah same

me too

lol thats why im here

Me too

Haha me too

Me 5

Same here

I think you win.

Limited goverment, limited and doing only the necesary for the existence of the nation, so a minimalistic aproach

Krysnha minarchy

@@Krysnha Which is unsustainable because governments always expand their influence

Indeed Albedo, indeed, but in the hipotetical case you have a minimum goverment with no intention to expand, of course again, imposible, human nature, those who have more want more, that is why is imposible to ever have a good goverment, human nature

bames jond Possible borderline enslavement of women ;u;

@@ScarrVett This kinda system would end up enslaving anyone who can't make enough money, are you saying women can't make money? Brawn would mean nothing here, brains would be everything, are you calling women stupid? That government involvement in these kinda things creates gender equality is a myth. In my country which have lots of government involvement with this, studies have found that the genders self segregate despite the government trying to prevent it. The only field that naturally ended up with a 50/50 gender ratio was politics. Truth is, just because some women likes fishing it doesn't mean that there are tons of women that secretly want to fish. And just because some men like styling hair, it doesn't mean there are tons of men that secretly want to style hair. Men and women simply don't like working together that much either. What the study found was that when the government force more women into a certain field men will leave that field. That is because this kind of capitalist system works on exploiting our natural instinct to compete, and men aren't in competition with women, they compete for women. And in the same way, women are not in competition with men, they compete with each other for men. Work was never really about making money, money was always just the rating system that told other people if you're mating material. Capitalism is essentially just the modern way of hitting each other with sticks and rocks to see who gets to have babies. In this system you won't be enslaved for being a woman, you will be enslaved for being poor. You can argue that men will try to keep women poor out of self interest, but men are just half the population, so it's not like women couldn't try to do the same to men. The only real advantage men have over women is physical strength, while women have the advantage of being more socially aware, and I'd dare to say that being more socially aware is a better advantage in a modern society such as this. Very few men are scared of using their physical strength against women, they're scared that woman will use her social influence to make other men punish him for doing so. So it's possible that in such a society with no government interference both violence and manipulation would become illegal, or both would be legal, both of which would actually make it more equal than our standards. Today, it's illegal for men to use his advantage, but it's not illegal for women to use her advantage, so I'd argue that women already have far more power than men in modern western society and it's just taking some time for the full effect of this to show. All a woman has to do is act scared and innocent and helpless and most men will happily use violence against other men to defend and protect her without even knowing the story, when it becomes clear that women are not so innocent and have equal or more power than men, this will change and men will stop having the desire to use force against other men. When this happens not only will we become more peaceful and end all wars, but women won't be able to get away with manipulation anymore either, and then we'll have accomplished the goals of feminism. It'll be a much more boring world, but a much safer one too as sexual drives will basically have been rendered inert and with it will go things like greed, power, control, and so on, and then we can finally build our perfect utopia and focus on more important things like finding spiritual enlightenment, protecting nature and creating art, while most work will become a thing of the past. That's why I'm a feminist despite that I think that most of modern feminism currently is just being ridiculous.

Daniel I'm not calling women stupid, I'm just saying that it's *possible* for an anarchist society to go by an extreme patriarchal structure for something like that to happen. There wouldn't be an institution to enforce "possible borderline enslavement of women", but maybe there's no institution to prevent that IF it's allowed and socially acceptable.

It's not definite, but it's possible

well considering that "gender equality" means equality of outcome you can't have an anarcho-capitalist system with socialistic policies

They know free markets are always superior.

SonicMaster Sword - all heil capitalism

This game was clearly designed by Austro-libertarians, because who the hell else knows who Ludwig von Mises is

You know this is a game right?

FBI open up!!! you are in possession of knowledge that shouldn't get out, you are under arrest.

"hippity hoppity get out my private property"

LMAO

"Free stuff? Sounds like communism *shoots you dead*"

Your paying. Not my taxes :)

@@RainbowManification not free, *complimentary*.

Not the governments.....at first.

Just imagine if the people of this country realize we have a central bank...

CommandoDude, that's some A+ government fearmongering/brainwashing, my dude ;)

yes!

Should’ve or should have

No He should named it FLORIDA CITY

e *state*

It's costly real e

And more beaches, and a marina.

And a Ski Slope... a lot of ski slopes.

because you have seen the deleterious effects of government. more freedom is better. the government slaps their rules on top of what humans deem fair, so the laws would never be needed anyways. they only sabotage. mostly.

Only because I watch Gray usually and never saw this video

Guilty

*thAt's juSt ThE gRaY wAy brO*

Lel Memes why does this seem stolen

Kris Murrell Aka every Democracy 3 playthrough ever 😛

So Venezuela.

pretty much every democratic country right now.

Everybody leaves and now you have a concrete desert. Good job.

@@xiconp1993 That's why fascists love walls. They don't just keep people out.

They couldn't move out, though. He never completely connected up that stupid break in the stupid, sloppy highway he made at first.

No, they die. Most commenters seem to forget, or don’t care about that fact

@@waluigiisthebest2802 better than the shitholes in California and Baltimore

He got the mechanic of the game wrong. That's not the aproval rate, that's how much that class will grow or shrink in size because of the decision. Basically everytime you see the lower class going down, and one of the others going up, it means people are becoming richier.

And that's how you solve poverty

Capitalism only works in a simulation.

@@ChangedMyNameFinally69 Nah. If the banana republics in central america have shown us anything, Capitalism works really well. It just isn't very fun for most people in the end.

@@Audiodump So it sucks then

@@ChangedMyNameFinally69 I mean...it has less genocides than communism.

@@Audiodump This nonsense again?

Wellll a few MILLION dead in the middle East and tens of millions here because of the FDA is pretty much the Purge right? Pledge allegiance baby

Temporarily?

@@crusaderking8277 in reality it’s different

@@NoName-mi7bd in reality we don't have anything close to anarchy. but the closest we have (switzerland, hong kong, australia, new zealand) are pretty much superior to every nation. and in general the weaker the government the freer the market, the more prosperous are the people.

@@DBV-iu1qw Australia’s government is incredibly over reaching what are you on about 😂

@@NoName-mi7bd if you could speak english i would probably be able to understand you

B-But the free market's gonna fix that.

@Brutus Tan Uber drivers aren't robots yet, and as I heard from them, they are severely underpaid, so we're still talking class oppression here

@Brutus Tan Could you please explain how what you just said is relevant to either my comment or the comment I replied to?

@Brutus Tan you say I sound socialist and am just saying Marxist "claptrap" as if you weren't just quoting neolib slogans You can say that class oppression doesn't exist as much as you want, it won't change the reality that it is the only way in which big corps can profit but ok, you say that I'm just wrong by association ignoring the entirety of the argument so I guess that there's nothing I can say to change your mind

@Brutus Tan also, did you just imply that it is hard for bigger companies to compete with smaller ones? Wtf

He knew someone would play a videogame?

@@Ayelis nah, i meant this is why he hated the american government system

I was actually thinking exactly this😂

@Ludvig Lindén ahh interesting. Do you think it would really work?

@Ludvig Lindén will do!

It's a little of both, really. With no government to enforce laws, the only rules are those that society agrees on together. Namely, nonaggression towards others unless that person commits aggression against you first. Typically that's about the only thing all humans can agree on. Anything else would have to be a local case by case basis.

Except that as we saw in this video, companies become the rulers.

@@BandNerdcp except that with free trade and no regulations, there will be greater competition from within and from without. So power will remain fragmented. No need to ask the government for permission = no special interests granted

1queijocas No subsidies either, and since there’s no bailouts from the (non existent) government, there can’t be any monopolies.

None of you have played the Crackdown series, huh?

I know its unbelievable, lol.

Sounds accurate. Give people the ability to do their own thing, and you would be surprised on what they can do.

You have to understand that once you realize the media always blows negative stories out of proportion because it gets more sales, that few people actually go on crime sprees relatively speaking. So why exactly would there suddenly be nothing but crime and chaos?

The rich is more heavily taxed and people still whine about these low-crime producers giving people too many jobs and salaries.

@@dragoneye6229 Pretty sure those employees working in this city are just slaves.

Yep

Triggered*

that's when a government is created lol

The governless evolved into a government.

@@aaronthebarbaric7733 Saudi Arabia has a $20,796 per capita income...

@@aaronthebarbaric7733All of that wealth is concentrated. Stop acting like some religious oligarchy is somehow the bastion of equity. Lol Wikipedia, easy there boomer sperg.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Gray, on the other hand, had no good intentions. In fact, he had no intentions for people at all.

@@MrJH101 True, even though his intention was to DESTROY make everything fall apart... in this case... instead of the world falling apart, breaking the game.... he did the exact opposite....

Otaku-chan Anime yep, this was a case of extreme irony. There have been countless leaders who always started off wanting to perform many great things, but ended up doing some real horrifying or brutal acts when they had power. And then we have Gray here, the anarchist who just wanted to see the world destroy itself for a few selfish laughs, but ended up making it better somehow without even intending it to work out that way. ...I guess it’s true what they say, “Nobody in politics truly gets what they want.”

@@MrJH101 I... honestly don't know whether to be impressed that he managed to unite people despite the fact that he actually want to make them suffer or disappointed that he didn't get his way to make everyone suffer... what do you think?

@a fantasy I think it was technically a win-win for him no matter what. Good stratagems always seek out the best possible outcomes. Great stratagems have outcomes where it’s never a loss either way.

Will you be building that micronation in a giant bio-dome complex just off the coast of Icelands capital? And will it be a place *_WHERE THE GREAT WILL NOT BE CONSTRAINED BY THE SMALL._*

Big Boss: the beginning

How do you plan to enforce money and private property without government?

I request to visit this nation

. _.

Me too

I would love that XD

I'm pretty sure there is but I cant for the life of me remember the name

There was Streets of Simcity and Simcopter, though no walking I'm afraid

It was called Metropolis 2 for the ps2. Was a dam good game when I was little

i have to assume robots are doing the shitty jobs. or is janitor now going to pay a living wage? or does this simulate individuals holding two jobs? two low class jobs would probably pay a person into being almost middle class.

@@sebcw1204 plus it ended up an oligarchy so I assume all the freedoms are lost and corporations own their asses now

When a state is communist, they start out OK, but end in debt. It is the complete opposite with capitalism.

@xellossaxon No, this has to do with the libertarian/authoritarian spectrum, not the economic right or left.

@Roger Dodger The problem with that is your model doesn't actually work out that way IRL. Why? Because people aren't one-size-fits-all robots nor are we all that logical. Our actions are based on emotion more than anything else. If you take all regulation out you end up with a few exceedingly wealthy people on top, with their yes-men and flunkies and back-stabbing schemers under them who manage all the poor working schlubs who get nothing. Such societies actually ENCOURAGE fairly high unemployment as a means of keeping wages suppressed and people desperate enough to do pretty much whatever they want for a bit of money. Is that logical for any kind of long term profit? Hell no. But does it make Bob On Top feel lots more secure in his wealth and to his mind, keep others from doing something better and taking his wealth and/or position/status? Yep. Oh, and those few people on top? They, in the interest of securing their positions, start making all kinds of rules that the commoners have to follow to make sure they stay working and don't cause too much trouble. And then, since they want the best for their kids, make sure all their wealth and power is passed down to their children. Welcome to the birth of aristocracy.

Same

Same.

What?

Don't fall in front of someone's lawn, you'll violate the NAP and get McNuked

@@Resident-of-Pluto smh if u violate private property do you even deserve life

@@Resident-of-Pluto and that’s a bad thing because…?

@@praxlandy I mean, if you like to be vapourised then you do you.

@@Resident-of-Pluto Why would you? and probably you aren't going to get killed if u fall into somebody's lawn, and a nuke would violate at least another people's NAP, so violating another NAP becouse another people violated NAP on you isn't the brightest idea.