Originally Posted by galleryseek

What I could propose as a single individual, could likely never compare to the response of the market. You've heard it before in economics 101, where there's a demand, there'll be a supply.

In a stateless society, people would want roads, defense, dispute resolution, and everything we currently have. The only difference is that instead of relying on a monopolistic force to provide these things for us, the driving force behind innovation and better pricing (a free and private market) would handle it instead.

But that's all consequentialism, which I don't like to get into. Slave owners said "who'll pick the cotton", we said "it doesn't matter, it's wrong to own humans", just as it's wrong to steal people's money to provide services.



Without taxes, there would be no state governments, so that's not a problem.





You do realize that "the will of the people" is a load of bullshit right? And the constitution is just scribblings on a piece of paper?

It's been proven that we live in an oligarchy. The US passes 40,000 new laws every year. Do you REALLY think these laws are representative of the will of the people?

Don't drink the government kool-aid indoctrination man.

Originally Posted by galleryseek

If you mean am I against being ruled by a group of people over a given piece of arbitrary land? Yes. I am.

State and federal governments and their branches are all a part of the same body and all funded in the same manner: taxation and expropriation.