I don't paying for the roads that ride on because if I don't pay they ain't gonna get built. I don't mind paying for police protection and don't mind paying the soldiers that protect my country providing that is what they are really doing.
I am not a greedy welfare queen that wants somebody else to pay for them.
I prefer user fees to general taxation.
I don't mind paying for certain things either, I just believe it's wrong to demand I do so by threat of violence. So, would you be willing to take the position that you're anti-taxation? Saying you don't prefer it is a point of contention because I'm citing it as a moral issue. To me, that's like saying, "I don't prefer that people be mugged" as opposed to saying, "I'm anti-mugging". Sort of a fence position, and I want to be clear about what you think.
Are you suggesting that taxation for the few necessary government functions should be optional?
For the kind of minimal government services I am talking about that would be very close to being impossible. How do we pay for a military on an optional basis? Most people would take the protection but not belly up the payment. The same with courts and police.
I prefer most things be based upon a user fee but there are a few (very few) things that should be collective.
We could have a very Libertarian or even an anarchy society that could work but not with the population that we have.
I am for very small government and a Libertarian and I hate government but I am not an anarchist. Maybe if the US had a population of 5 million it would be feasible but not with 330 million.
Thank you for explaining yourself so thoroughly.
Considering our upbringing, it feels as though by saying “there should be no coercive taxation” that we are making a pro-active decision. But in reality, no coercive taxation is the natural state of things, and in every moment that we support something else, we are pro-actively making
that choice.
In other words, if things were in their natural, free state, when would be a good time to say “Hey, you know what we should do to get funding for what we deem important? We should threaten everyone with violence. Then we’ll get all the funding we need, and we don’t have to bother convincing people that what we want is important!”
You see how a paradigm shift reveals the true nature of our actions. Immorality always has short-sighted benefits that circumvent the hard work of doing things the right way. But there are no shortcuts, and we pay, one way or another.
There’s no reason why things have to be organized across 325 million people. If the Federal Government was dissolved, we may be connected by a shared culture and commercial market, but we could generally have our voluntary society organized more locally. In any case, moral people really don’t have the option to rob people, regardless of the problems that creates. I trust that mankind can find new solutions to new challenges, just as it always has.
I understand your points and am in sympathy with your basic concept.
I can't believe I defending government. I hate government. I wish the Federal government was 1/20th the size that it is now. I wish human nature was such that we didn't need a military and police and courts and things like that. I wish the government would get out of my life. Government robs us of liberty and is a mechanisms for state sponsored thievery.
Maybe if there were only a few of us we could live like you suggest. However, in a population of over 300 million in the US and seven billion in the world then we do need some collective services.
I feel your pain. Quite literally, as I read your words. How I wish that people would snap out of their stupor and understand that their immorality is preventing a paradise on this planet. There’s enough for everyone, and we can cooperate and be happier, and shouldn’t even need to exercise force for self-defense because no one would ever feel so desperate that they would desire harm for another.
Such as things are, some are not ready. However, I
will not be among them. I will not allow speculative fears to guide my behavior. I will not point to their immorality to justify my own, such that others may point to mine and feel justified themselves.
Everything in you is screaming “this is wrong”. You
know it is wrong. You only
think that we need it.
We cannot cite human nature because we don’t
know human nature. It’s never been free enough in recorded history to show its true quality. Technology has liberated us from many hardships of our environment, and widespread sharing of information has made the height of man’s knowledge available at our fingertips.
Now, just one thing remains - to learn the self-responsibility of living morally without bonds upon our wrists. To be both moral and free, through the knowledge that this is not only within man’s potential, but is our destiny.
But we must leave the nest to fly. We don’t get any guarantees before we head out. We need faith that we can do it on our own, and seeing what man has accomplished, even while in bondage, I am confident that he will soar to meet any challenge once free.
Will you keep him bound and deny him that opportunity? If people like you - who understand so well - will keep him bound, who’s left that we can we turn to, to set him free?