Genuine question for Libertarians

In an ideal Libertarian/ancap society, how would zoning/urban planning work?

Attached: 519-2.jpg (1280x786, 340K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=I081OvfZZtc
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

the free market would decide

disputes would be settled in the battle dome you fuckin dummy lmao

But... How would you even 'pick the options between which the free market would be deciding' (so to speak) in the first place?
I want to understand how urban planning would actually work IN PRACTICE.

Attached: barcino-main-sites.jpg (795x388, 161K)

In a libertarian society it'd probably be taken care of by the government, because libertarian=/=ancap
In an ancap society it'd be taken care of by the local McWarlord and anyone that infringes on his private property and thus violates the NAP is subject to Recreational™ Nuclear™ Missiles®

You seen some old ass films? Like the ones with knights n sheeet?
That's how it works.

in all likelihood it would be a consortium of landowners agreeing on what to put where and how best to 'juice' renters without killing the market by bleeding them dry in the short-term with upfront payments, fees, etc.
much like a typical city is run today, but more efficient and wholly privatized. hell i bet you'd even get discounted rates for being a public works employee.

>In a libertarian society it'd probably be taken care of by the government, because libertarian=/=ancap
>In an ancap society it'd be taken care of by the local McWarlord and anyone that infringes on his private property and thus violates the NAP is subject to Recreational™ Nuclear™ Missiles®
Problem?

It work the same as it did in postwar Japan: no zoning just build whatever seems right where it seems right

That sounds like inviting a medieval shithole.

Anarcho-capitalists endorse civil law and private property rights.

If you own land and the owner of some other land in the neighbourhood does something to diminish the value of your land, then you may be able to receive damages from that other land owner. The rulings of court to determine the payout. Court rulings set precedent so it becomes clear what rules are enforced by courts and to what extent.

But there are other factors affecting land use. The buyer who can extract the greatest value from land will be able to bid the highest price, this will have an effect on which land is used for what.

An extension of the first point could be a class action type case. Imagine a noisy 24 hour a day factory being built in an area surrounded by residential houses. All those house owner could combine to sue the factory owner. Of course this also leaves open the possibility that the factory owner could pay off the house owners, naturally this would only happen if the value generated by the factory in that location was worth the cost of paying off the house owners.

much like Israel

Attached: 1518872559064.png (1430x1068, 604K)

Yeah, the Arab villages maybe.
THOSE have no effective zoning regulation. They look fucking awful and everything is a tangled mess of narrow streets and dirt alleyways.

sounds like tokyo just with more dirt

You would build a 100m tower next to a family house for shits and giggles. Oh, you like the sun? Too bad, you fucker. Mine now.

How would you even prove that a property's value was diminished due to ONE SPECIFIC factory nearby? What if it was diminished due to some other factors? What if the factory actually improved the land value but equally reduced the property value?
Sounds awfully vague and ripe for "I got da best lawyers so I win" fudging.

And this explanation doesn't clear up how urban planning (or, really, any planning whatsoever) would happen.

For existing cities:
When you dissolve a municipal government, you create a private company and assign shares in that company to every citizen, depending on how much tax they've paid in the past. The company manages the roads, streetlamps, sidewalks, etc. To prevent "certain externalities", this company will probably set up walls and checkpoints all around the city.
The company's main revenue is from all the toll roads. If the downtown businesses want to make the roads free to bring in more external money, they just negotiate with the city company to make up the difference.

For new cities:
Some entrepreneur decides to buy up a large parcel of land and create a colony. He hires an urban planner to lay it out the new colony in a way that will maximize profit, i.e. will increase quality of life and make people want to move there.
"Owning" property inside the colony could take any profitable form you can imagine. You can have limited property titles which delineate which rights the colony has reserve for itself. Eventually, best practices for city management are created through trial and error.

We don't need it.

Zoning violates the NAP.

>a private company and assign shares in that company to every citizen, depending on how much tax they've paid in the past. The company manages the roads, streetlamps, sidewalks, etc.
...so a government?

Yes you do.

If you actually wanted to understand how an ancap society could work, you would go and research it.
Not expect people to sum it up in a single post on the chans.
Weak kike shill bait thread.

>(((urban planning)))
the free market will do the planning.
zoning boards and code enforcement exist solely to redistribute wealth

>Jew wanting to know how to get on the zoning committee.
QUIT BEING A GODDAMN KIKE

>Eventually, best practices for city management are created through trial and error
Does this mean that the landscape is dotted with hundreds of post-apocalyptic abandoned cities?

>the free market will do the planning.
But HOW?
I want to understand the institutional mechanics behind it (like explained for zoning)

>you would go and research it
That's what I'm doing.

>How would you even 'pick the options'
Demand dictates price. If there's no demand for a product (a certain parcel of land, say) from people who would provide a service (electrical lines?), the price providers are willing to pay to control the zone goes down, and someone else with enough demand ("I really, really want to build a hotel here") is willing to pay a higher price than the competition. So a hotel gets built instead of power lines.

Maybe later the power company decides they are finally willing to run lines in that area, and the hotel owner agrees to sell or lease thoroughfare rights to them.

explain why urban planning is necessary first

Because medieval-esque shitholes are inefficient.

>inefficient
And bloated urban bureaucracies, accountable to no one either ethically or financially, are obviously so superior in every way that it doesn't even need to be demonstrated.

Google "urban corruption." What you learn may surprise you.

Oy vey! You goyim need planning commissions and sky high property taxes don't you see? Otherwise your neighbor would just build a nuclear power plant on one side of your house and a 25 story high rise on the other!

I don't like your flag, but you are mainly taking flack from these anons because they don't have any answers. The correct answer is that it wouldn't work and couldn't work -- it's why you never get any specifics from these guys. Way easier to call you a shill or tell you to look it up.

Lolbertarianism when looked at makes about as much sense as the Scientology story -- ya just gotta believe, no matter how far fetched.

>they don't have any answers

see
Those are all "answers," it's simply that none of them are "answer you happen to like." Fuck off, leaf.

Ya, answers like the ones Scientology gives you. It's just a fucking fairy tale for the disaffected.

Wouldn't it be terribly inefficient if powerlines have to zigzag through the land according to who was willing to charge the least/most for the right to build them?

How about roads? How do those get built? Does a homeowner need to negotiate with every single location he want to visit so a road gets built there? What if that road needs to go through a third party's property? Can he just link up to a nearby road previously built by someone else and just hope it eventually somehow connects to the destinations you need? Why would all the people who hold land between point A to point B be willing to just let others use their roads like that? Does that mean that just visiting the local grocery shop involves passing through 6 separate tollbooths?

Those bloated bureaucracies make very nice boulevards.

Have you actually read any of the posts you linked? Because:
• is a bunch of vacuous babble
• is obviously taking the piss
• sounds awful and almost like a parody
Only and are actual answers. simply re-introduces government under a different name, while fails to answer the more central question regarding urban planning.

How is a stadium 0 pollution, do the trucks that deliver everything just teleport there?

So many people would die off that this wouldn't really be a problem, you could build whatever the fuck you wanted whereever you wanted.

You call that a city?

Attached: Cities 2018-01-19 19-51-57-89.jpg (1920x1080, 170K)

scandis have no idea what football is like and have never seen an ultra in their lives

does not really reintroduce the government because he centers ownership around homesteading. you'd need to, go there, and build shit to own it, or to buy it from someone who was doing just that. governments make territorial claims that go beyond what they directly exploit and prevent unused land and resources to be taken up by anyone else

Well if it truly is Libertarian/Ancap, then zoning/urban planning would be done by the market

>How about roads? How do those get built?
By a road building company, same as they are now.
>Does a homeowner need to negotiate with every single location he want to visit so a road gets built there?
Consider this: there's less value in building a customer-facing structure if there's no road to it! A road will get built to a cluster of locations - probably for example a pedestrian commercial area encompassing 100 acres or less, but I'm spitballing - and lots in this area that has road access will be sold.
>What if that road needs to go through a third party's property? Can he just link up to a nearby road previously built by someone else and just hope it eventually somehow connects to the destinations you need?
Yeah, isn't that how roads work?
>Why would all the people who hold land between point A to point B be willing to just let others use their roads like that?
They gettin paid
>Does that mean that just visiting the local grocery shop involves passing through 6 separate tollbooths?
Could be. My guess is that the 2 or 3 competing road builders/owners in a city could profit from selling their operational management to some larger company (let's call two of these larger companies PayQwik and EZPass). If you subscribe to one of these larger companies, you get a little RFID/NFC type thing to put in your car (these exist now) and a certain number of tolls included in your monthly fee, depending on what level subscription you buy. A conversation from such a society: "Hey man, can you take me to Joe's party? His road is EXPass, but all I've got is PayQwik." "Sure, if you'll spot me a couple bucks." "No problem. Boy I love not being extorted for half my income at the point of a government gun!"

> (You) #
>Those bloated bureaucracies make very nice boulevards.
Muh roads, so all the inefficiency, human rights violations, graft, bribery, and corruption are fine and dandy.