>From: Grey Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >User-fees are an excellent idea, but I don't think >incompatible with a Lib-Georgist land value tax: >Who supports the judiciary? Who supports the >Dept. of War? er, Defense? -- property owners, >who need/use local police and international police, >as well as courts, to defend their property rights.
If, hypothetically speaking, all "public goods" could be internalized, and paid for with user fees, what public domain would be left to fund with land taxes? In the case of law enforcement, decentralize it to the smallest local level, place it under direct democratic control, and make its services voluntary and based on user fees. I suspect the need for any kind of law enforcement in a heavily armed society would be much less (look at the anecdotal evidence about Kennesaw, Ga.). And a decentralized, cooperatively-controlled police force could be combined with aspects of the current neighborhood watch system, posse comitatus, etc., in ways that would drastically reduce cost. As for "defense," a decentralized, stateless society would present few concentrated targets of value to foreign predators; it would have no central government to surrender; and local citizens' militias, federated as needed, would make any enemy so clueless as to invade pay "rent" in blood for every square foot of land occupied. Let maritime merchants pay the cost of their own convoy systems against piracy. The rest of the foreign "threats" the U.S. military "defends" against, it seems to me, all involve what some power on the other side of the globe might do within a few hundred miles of its own border. >I personally support smaller, annual fee-taxes, >rather than less frequent, much larger transaction >fees (eg. house ownership transfer fee of some $40 000), >for such "night watchman state" funding. > >BTW, I like the comparison of a minarchist >"night watchman state" with the current, and >increasing, "nanny state". (If you want to >get infected with that linguistic meme.) >Words and phrases are important, I doubt that >we can change "public schools" into "gov't schools", >but if that gov't label had been given earlier, it >might have stuck, and would certainly be easier >to reform now. That's the word I like to use, but it gets me labelled as "one of them militia nuts"--odd, since I have an IWW sticker on my car. >Finally, I also favor "user-fees" on pollution. >I think that land-tax and pollution tax can, >and should, replace all personal income tax. >My desire for companies to pay for the benefit >of corporate limited liability makes me hesitate >to elliminate the corporate income tax altogether, >but reducing it, certainly. Interesting--how would the pollution-fees be assessed, and pollution measured? Through some kind of libertarian tort law? On the issue of limited liability, Rothbard argued that it could be established (vis a vis creditors) without any state, simply by including it up front in the terms of the contract. Limited tort liability, he said, was of relatively minor importance. In the case of a few industries, of course, (the nuclear power industry in particular), they almost certainly couldn't survive without the state's intervention to limit their liability. Good riddance! _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
