So in the given example... who pays the enforcement company? The one who was stolen from, or the "perpitrator?" I guess the only logical answer is that, if found guilty, the perpetrator pays, if found innocent the accuser pays? 🤔 I guess that's obvious right?
Agorism appeals to me on some deep core level, but I have an aweful lot of questions which I fear would simply be answered by "the market decides"... when I look at history I do not see compelling evidence that free markets act responsibly. Post industrial revolution, United Kingdom was a very free market and the results where horrendous on many levels...