[Mr. Anderson]

I am just curious: If there are no taxes in a libertarian system, how will the military be funded? If there will be privately-operated militias instead, will consent be required for them to fight?

[Todd D.]

There are taxes in a Libertarian society, just nowhere near the amount and nowhere near the need for a federal income tax. A military that is strictly confined to protecting national DEFENSE would not need all that much money in the form of taxes.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Actually, there are no taxes in a libertarian society. Funding would have to voluntary. Naturally, taxation wouldn't be abolished overnight.

[Pope Perseus Peptabysmal]

I always Libertarianism would be paid for by something like a service fee of sorts. Instead of everyone paying for the highway project in your state, anyone with a car pays a fee to use the highway so that people who have no use of it don't pay for it. Defense spending I figured would be the only existing tax left, but I guess I'm mistaken.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Roads would be privately owned in a libertarian society, though usage fees would supplant taxation until all roads had been privatized.

[Pope Perseus Peptabysmal]

Roads would be privately owned in a libertarian society, though usage fees would supplant taxation until all roads had been privatized.

At the risk of derailing the topic, Mass Transport is pretty much dead in this country save for subways, buses, and taxis in cities. Now how can you get any private investor to start-up a passenger train line for low cost travel?

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Roads would be privately owned in a libertarian society, though usage fees would supplant taxation until all roads had been privatized.

At the risk of derailing the topic, Mass Transport is pretty much dead in this country save for subways, buses, and taxis in cities. Now how can you get any private investor to start-up a passenger train line for low cost travel?

Passenger railroads were killed in this country in part because of the massive federal interstate program, and in part because of the de facto nationalization of the passenger rail industry into Amtrak, a pathetically wasteful and inefficient "company" that constantly clamors for more government subsidies. If roads were no longer subsidized, passenger rail would likely make a comeback, since there are a number of routes that make a lot of sense for passenger rail.

[Noumenon]

Any society with taxes, even minimal taxes, is not completely libertarian. The military would be dependent on donations.

I always Libertarianism would be paid for by something like a service fee of sorts. Instead of everyone paying for the highway project in your state, anyone with a car pays a fee to use the highway so that people who have no use of it don't pay for it. defence spending I figured would be the only existing tax left, but I guess I'm mistaken.

A lot of moderate libertarians believe that there are some services government could provide with service fees, such as public roads and parks.

[MB.]

Anyway, back to the military: Without a centeral government... or any government for that matter, how could a military exsist and function?

[Noumenon]

Who said therecan't be a central government in a libertarian society? Well, anarcho-capitalists believe that, but not most libertarians. An anarcho-capitalist society would not have a formal military.

[MB.]

So inform me!

What will the centeral government handle? How large will it be? how will it be funded?

[Garibaldi]

A central government would handle military, police, the judiacary system, and you'll have to talk to somebody else for the extent of the legislative branch. The answer would have to be indepth; the basic concept is only enough to protect our rights, but that leaves it open to interpretation by those who want to minipulate libertarianism.

[Steven_K]

I know this stuff is being debated in the official debate,but here is my general question. Why would people in a libertarian society put money into a centralized military/police force, where their only say would be through the democratic system, instead of building their own that they control completely? It seems obvious that people would end up creating their own small-scale militaries, which would lead to smallscale warfare and basically a feudal state.

[Noumenon]

Well this would be the constitution for my ideal government (from smashthestate's constitution of SmashLand thread):

1. The government of NoumenonLand may not adopt any power not specified in this Constitution.
2. The government of NoumenonLand is given these powers:

- Provide for the common defence, including the power to build and maintain a volunteer army, navy, and air force, and the power to use these forces to repel an invasion or stop an imminent threat.

-Punish any violation of the natural rights of life, liberty, and property, or any committer of fraud. The punishment shall consist of a fine, community service, imprisonment, or death (in the most extreme cases), and shall only be implemented with due process of law. The accused must be guaranteed a trial by jury and a lawyer if he so wishes, and may not be compelled to bear witness against himself. The accused has the right to a speedy and public trial, and the right to be informed of the nature of the accusation.

-To grant copyrights and temporary patents, and punish violations of those with fines.

-Build highways and other roads deemed necessary to ensure safe and efficient transportation accross NoumenonLand.

-Protect the borders of Noumenon with armed forces, ensuring that no one enters without a background check to make sure they are not a criminal or enemy of NoumenonLand. The government of NoumenonLand must allow any peaceful person or thing to cross the border, with the exception of items such as nuclear weapons that pose a threat to NoumenonLand.

-Ratify treaties, so long as they comply with this Constitution.

-Hold annual elections for Commander in Chief of the armed forces, who shall have no power except during national emergency. His power then shall consist of directing the armed forces and appointing advisors. The armed forces must comply with all relevant treaties regarding war crimes. If the Commander in Chief is found guilty of war crimes, he may be impeached and replaced with a majority vote of both houses of congress.

-To make all laws necessary to carry out the foregoing powers.

-To collect voluntary payments from its citizens to pay for these services.

3. The government of NoumenonLand must consist of two Houses, a Senate and a House of Representatives, and a Supreme Court and lesser courts. The members of the Senate shall be elected every four years, and no Senator may serve longer than two four year terms. The members of the House of Representatives shall be elected every two years, and may serve no longer than two two year terms. Both the Senate and House shall convene once annually to make all necessary laws, and their session shall end once they determine by majority vote that all necessary laws have been passed. All laws shall be passed with the majority vote of both houses. The Supreme Court may veto a law if it is deemed unconstitutional. The Houses shall also have the power to convene during a national emergency, summon the Commander in Chief of the armed forces if measures to repel invasion or stop an imminent threat are deemed necessary. Members of the Supreme Court (which shall number 9 justices) shall be appointed by the Senate, and approved by a majority vote in the House. Members who do not adhere to this Constitution may be impeached with the majority votes of the House and Senate.

This government would be funded mainly through anonymous donations (to prevent corruption). There could be taxes for using public roads and parks, but not paying them would not be a crime. You simply would not be allowed to use those services.

Libertarians aren't really in agreement over how small the government should be. But they all agree that its purpose is the protection of individual rights, not wealth redistribution or anything else.

[Noumenon]

I know this stuff is being debated in the official debate,but here is my general question. Why would people in a libertarian society put money into a centralized military/police force, where their only say would be through the democratic system, instead of building their own that they control completely? It seems obvious that people would end up creating their own small-scale militaries, which would lead to smallscale warfare and basically a feudal state.

EDIT: i think I'll save this argument for the debate.

[MB.]

...The punishment shall consist of a fine, community service, imprisonment, or death (in the most extreme cases)...

Doesn't having a death penalty in a Libretarian society contradict the purpose of that society?

[smashthestate]

Doesn't having a death penalty in a Libretarian society contradict the purpose of that society?

Most Libertarians are opposed to the death penalty for any crime, myself included.

[Noumenon]

I believe the death penalty is consistent with the libertarian idea of proportionality. The punishment must fit the crime. If you steal $5,000, you must return the $5000 and the victim can decide on a fine of $0-5000 (which goes to the victim, not the state). The death penalty would only be acceptable if the victim wrote in his will or something that if he was murdered, his murderer should be executed. Call that barbaric if you want, I call it justice. There is nothing unlibertarian about retaliatory force. If you can kill someone attempting to murder you, why can't you leave in your will that you want them killed if they succeed? On the other hand, if you're against the death penalty, you could leave in your will an alternate punishment (as long as it doesn't exceed the crime) or no punishment at all. In a libertarian society, only victims have the power to decide on the punishment, not the state or anyone else.

[MB.]

I call it and Eye for and Eye.

And not very productive at that.

That state NEVER has the authority to execute people.

And by your logic there Noumenon, a duel tot he death is perfectly acceptable.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I call it and Eye for and Eye.

And not very productive at that.

That state NEVER has the authority to execute people.

And by your logic there Noumenon, a duel tot he death is perfectly acceptable.

Yes, it is, so long as it is voluntary.

And with that in mind...*slap* You have offended me, Mr Bill! I demand satisfaction!