addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupsimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Re: [atheists-27] Liberal and Conservative?

From: Duff M.
Sent on: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 3:56 PM
What about the road leading to my house? What about the road further beyond, that connects my neighborhood to the highway?

If I maintain it at my own cost, my neighbors receive the benefit at no cost. If I don't maintain it, I lose access to emergency services, to deliveries from stores I make purchases from, etc.

If we collectivize the maintenance - then we've established a state, and taxes that must be collected "by force"

There is a limit to libertarianism. Infrastructure is one of those limits.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM, bruce <[address removed]> wrote:
That's why streets and sidewalks should be owned and operated by business districts, neighborhood associations, private companies, anyone but government.  Government doesn't clean them or fix them, allows potholes and sink holes and craters, muggers and rapists, rats and other vermin, marching nazis and the Westboro baptist church.  Anyone else would have a profit motive or some self interest in protecting the consumer.

On Tuesday, March 12, 2013, Duff Means wrote:
The sidewalk leading directly to the store's door is a direct financial benefit, just as much as having the store itself is.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Zach Moore <[address removed]> wrote:

The side walks are the essence of an indirect financial benefit.

On Mar 12,[masked]:42 PM, "Duff Means" <[address removed]> wrote:
The mall builds the sidewalks because it, and the stores that do business there, know that there is a direct financial benefit to them for having those sidewalks.

If stores and individuals saw a direct financial benefit to having publicly maintained roads, I doubt we'd be having this discussion... but since that benefit is indirect (in that people having a road to their house allows them to go to any store, not just the store that is paying the tax) then the tax needs to be imposed.

I should point out, before this gets too far - I am not in favor of ALL taxes, nor do I believe that all government spending and regulation benefits all of civilization. I do think all taxes and all regulations should have a clear public benefit, or should be eliminated.  As an example, government subsidies to oil companies, or bridges to nowhere, or excessive military-industrial complexes, are inappropriate uses of our tax dollars. Likewise, regulations that create a barrier to entering the market for small companies give advantages to large companies are inappropriate.

I am not in favor of communism - but I do agree with Chad's points completely.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Zach Moore <[address removed]> wrote:

You won't get our money by threatening us with jail and we are the ones that can provide the goods. Malls don't threaten me for walking on their sidewalks if I don't buy things in the's a free service provided by the stores for the purpose of making purchases easier. The mall owner persuaded the store owners to supply the resources needed to erect and maintain the mall and its sidewalks. If this can be done voluntarily, then I am not convinced roads must be built via slave labor.

On Mar 12,[masked]:25 PM, "Duff Means" <[address removed]> wrote:
I assume, then, that when when you're going to the grocery store, you don't drive on publicly-maintained roads? When your house catches fire, you don't call the public fire department? When you get robbed in the street, or someone breaks in to your house, you don't call 911? You don't send your kids to public schools?

You still rely on government regulations to keep you safe, whether you want to admit it or not. Regulations keep the electric company from sending you power that is unsafe, and the water company from poisoning you with unclean water or unsafe pipes. Regulations keep other people's cars maintained at an adequate level to ensure your safety, or remove them from the road.

You're a fool to think that you are doing it on your own. It's not intimidation to point out that you benefit from the infrastructure and civilization those taxes buy.

If nothing else, you benefit from roads you will never even drive on, because it allows other companies to acquire and deliver the goods they need to provide to you the goods and services you consume.

Arrogance like that is what makes libertarianism non-viable.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Zach

Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by bruce ([address removed]) from DC Atheists Meetup.
To learn more about bruce, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy