Free market goverment

[Sima]

 

There is no technical reason not to show all goverments expenses online, they all have computers in their offices.

I was discussing with my husband how to do things with the goverment till we get new generation of children , who grew up with non violence principes.

 

We got an idea it should be like market goverment.

If its safe to buy with Bitcoins it can be safe to take countrywide decisions online.

It means i buy with my private taxes online  something: for example 

i agree with the war, i go online, i vote (buy) it. The war budget is a fixed sum for next year. They divide that amount  from the amount of people, who voted for it, and the bill is send to the voter, who said yes. If he sees the bill is too big, he can rethink if he really wants war.

those who voted against, dont get the bill.

Or you decide to vote for public schools, then you pay tax for it and you let your children to it. But then would be less public schools. Like you buy a bus ticket. 

Every cent the goverment spends is online: everything. And you can see it. 

So you buy something with your taxes. Then you see goverment people who did decisions, how much they spent on  that action, they can be fired with a click of the button, if there is a big amount of people who vote with their tax and they dont like how things are going.

All expenses are open, like: this was spend for office rent, this for coffee, this for buying chairs for school and so on.

If you can safely pay with Bitcoins for goods, you can as safely pay with your taxes for things you want in the country.

 

We kinda decided that you can have private schools and universities as private. Then there is the question what to do with orphans or disabled people. We kinda have to make it mandatory to pay for them? In case you children become orphans later? So if you helped those people all your life, you will get help if something happens?

OK, lets say we got orphanages. We see how much expenses were for food , clothes, education. Should we put online stuff like what are the school grades of these children? Should local people wisit those orphanages and write rewievs? like we do online when we watch a movie or buy something from Ebay? 

 

we have this totally open goverment who does work for people, because we can fire them with a click of the button the same day we didnt like what they do.

We can pay taxes for unemployment benefits, and later get one as well. But online we offer how money should be spent. You have a list of choises, and you sen you tax money to one or few of them.

Lets say options: pay for everyone only for two years, pay for everyone only for two months. People decide online witch option they want .All money and all benefit amounts are online. And the thing is that you actually will pay when the budget is calculated and divided from amount of people who voted for it? Every year you get a bill where is said: so many people unemployd, we paid so much, your share is this. You can say im so good with my work, i dont buy unemployment  taxfor myself. So we leave those who are not so lucky to beg in the streets? 

Yes,there are some issues to work out.  

 

 

[Mister Mister]

what you are describing is not a government, because it would not have a monopoly over particular services within a given geographical area

[LibertarianSocialist]

What happens when people no longer want the services? Imagine if defence was funded so. Once income streams dry up, could you imagine a fully fledged army of government wage dependent soldiers simply disbanding? My bet is they make up some excuse why involuntary taxation is necessary, or simply violently impose their demands through the creation of a new military state.

 

If we check this by ensuring multiple competing service providers, we are straight back to vanilla ancapism.

[Mister Mister]

What happens when people no longer want the services? Imagine if defence was funded so. Once income streams dry up, could you imagine a fully fledged army of government wage dependent soldiers simply disbanding? My bet is they make up some excuse why involuntary taxation is necessary, or simply violently impose their demands through the creation of a new military state.

 

If we check this by ensuring multiple competing service providers, we are straight back to vanilla ancapism.

I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, but I'm SOOO tired and bored of anarchy disaster scenarios, these things have been discussed again and again, I'll find it in the FDR archives if you like.  The short answer is that you are not some genius who is the first person to have ever thought of these objections, every customer, every investor, will have thought of these things, and steps will be taken to prevent them, otherwise people will not give money and weapons to a defense agency.

[LibertarianSocialist]

I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, but I'm SOOO tired and bored of anarchy disaster scenarios, these things have been discussed again and again, I'll find it in the FDR archives if you like.  The short answer is that you are not some genius who is the first person to have ever thought of these objections, every customer, every investor, will have thought of these things, and steps will be taken to prevent them, otherwise people will not give money and weapons to a defense agency.

What? This was not even an anarchist proposal? It was an idea for a voluntarily funded government with monopoly privilege, correct me if I am wrong.

 

Of course they would think out the problems first, that is why competition is the inevitable conclusion. If that was achieved it would be straight to full ancapism. Historically, attempts at reformism has failed every time. Anarchism can't be achieved through the state, the bolsheviks already tried.

[Alan C.]

All services should be provided by the market in the same way as it currently provides cars, food, personal care products, household items, cookware, furniture, clothing, computers, and electronics. There is no need to have governments provision anything.

 

Public voting is a bad idea. The masses tend to be stupid, and I'm not interested in my neighbors' ill-informed, unqualified opinions.

 

Military States can only last so long as there are supplies to raid because a State cannot trade with itself (as Mises pointed out a century ago) and once the price mechanism breaks down, so does the economy.

[AncapFTW]

My idea for a "government" would have every service funded either by subscription or via donations, like on a crowd funding site.   If someone wanted to support the military, or a part of it, they would donate on military's fundraising site.  Things like the police, fire, road department, etc. would be subscription based or a hybrid.  Ex:  I don't want the police for my personal services (my DRO does a better job), but because I am in tourism, I give them $30 per month to protect tourists.  I do, however, use their roads some, so I pay $10 a month to the road department for 500 miles per month allowance.

 

To make this work, you'd need to establish that they couldn't force anyone to donate or subscribe, or ban competition in any area, otherwise it would just become a tax system again.

[Mister Mister]

What? This was not even an anarchist proposal? It was an idea for a voluntarily funded government with monopoly privilege, correct me if I am wrong.

 

Of course they would think out the problems first, that is why competition is the inevitable conclusion. If that was achieved it would be straight to full ancapism. Historically, attempts at reformism has failed every time. Anarchism can't be achieved through the state, the bolsheviks already tried.

Sorry, I didn't really understand you at first, now I get it.  There is no such thing as a voluntarily funded government, it's an oxymoron.  If it is voluntary, that means you can withdraw resources from them just like you could with any other private entity, and they will not interfere with other people providing those services.  I think it's funny that you said "we are straight back to vanilla ancapism".  First of all true vanilla is the seedpod of a particular species of orchid which only grows in a particular tropical region in Asia, and can only be harvested at a certain time of year.  It's flavor is quite unique and delectable, once you've tasted the real thing you'll be quite unimpressed with synthetic vanilla, which I believe is made from some part of a pig.  Anyway it's just funny that vanilla has come to mean plain and ordinary when in reality it is quite exotic and special.  And it's funny you would say "vanilla ancapism" as if it's something boring and cliche, when it is quite a revolutionary and obscure idea to most people.

 

Yes of course I agree Anarchism can't be achieved through the state.  I don't know what you mean though that the bolsheviks already tried.  The bolsheviks were murderous zealots who seized control of the State in order to impose their vision of society on millions of unsuspecting peasants.  What's that to do with anarchism?

[LibertarianSocialist]

Lol at vanilla, is true.

 

Technically the bolsheviks wanted to utilize authoritarian state socialism as a means of transitioning to voluntary communism, communism being a stateless and classless society. Needless to say the authoritarians 'forgot' that second part and cemented their despotic rule.

[Sima]

It can be called whatever name, its about the principe: buying services and taking part in decisions directly.  When you decide something, you pay for it. You go against decision, you dont pay. Thanks guys for comments.