> I agree with most of what you said, but it seems silly to have everyone pay into taxes when they're net receivers of benefits. What's silly is letting people

> I agree with most of what you said, but it seems silly to have everyone pay into taxes when they're net receivers of benefits. What's silly is letting people who are net tax-receivers have any say in how much other people pay in taxes. No representation without net taxation! Caveat: It's difficult to measure, but the cost of regulation (which does not include merely respecting others' natural rights) should really be counted as a form of tax. One idea would be to actually pay people to follow the regulations, as an equitable trade and not a benefit. The net tax-payers in charge would then be responsible for contributing the resources needed to make it worthwhile for the rest to comply with the regulations they propose. Anyone who doesn't comply simply doesn't get paid.