4 ms·

You might disagree with the wars that your country prosecutes, or what the police do, but you cannot just "take the tax money and choose how to spend it" for mi

You might disagree with the wars that your country prosecutes, or what the police do, but you cannot just "take the tax money and choose how to spend it" for military, nor police, nor any other commons. Why would you expect to do that for general education? Unlike, say, army, however, you are free to pay for private school. So, take the money that you have, and pay for private school, and be thankful that you live in a society that values education enough to make it available for all, because the alternative is dreadful. If you feel that general education is not up to high enough standards, this may well be true. Whatever the answer to that, it is not for people who don't have children, or choose private education for their children, to "take the tax money and choose how to spend it".

rglullis 5y ago
> You might disagree with the wars that your country prosecutes, or what the police do, but you cannot just "take the tax money and choose how to spend it" for military, nor police, nor any other commons. I know that this is not what being discussed, but just for the sake of exchanging some ideas... In my ideal model for governance, this would be possible. In my ideal taxation model, we would only pay taxes at the most local sphere: municipalities. And everything would be either based/budgeted on either (a) insurance funds or (b) service fees. States and Federal Government would then only as act as managers of mutual insurance funds between the cities themselves. IOW, it would all be a giant bottom-up insurance/re-insurance system. This way, the allocation of funds going to military spending wouldn't be determined by the individual, but it would be very close to that. Healthcare as well. Education could be financed both via a "service fee" (to cover the regular, cheap students) and an insurance fee (to cover for students with special needs). So those without kids and those that want to put their kids on private school would be able to claim a deduction for the "service part", but still had to contribute for the insurance part.

rglullis 5y ago

> You might disagree with the wars that your country prosecutes, or what the police do, but you cannot just "take the tax money and choose how to spend it" for military, nor police, nor any other commons. I know that this is not what being discussed, but just for the sake of exchanging some ideas... In my ideal model for governance, this would be possible. In my ideal taxation model, we would only pay taxes at the most local sphere: municipalities. And everything would be either based/budgeted on either (a) insurance funds or (b) service fees. States and Federal Government would then only as act as managers of mutual insurance funds between the cities themselves. IOW, it would all be a giant bottom-up insurance/re-insurance system. This way, the allocation of funds going to military spending wouldn't be determined by the individual, but it would be very close to that. Healthcare as well. Education could be financed both via a "service fee" (to cover the regular, cheap students) and an insurance fee (to cover for students with special needs). So those without kids and those that want to put their kids on private school would be able to claim a deduction for the "service part", but still had to contribute for the insurance part.