4 ms·

Taxation is theft. That's a fact. In some circumstances that's a necessary evil. However that does not make it always proper to do. You're looking for a way to

Taxation is theft. That's a fact. In some circumstances that's a necessary evil. However that does not make it always proper to do. You're looking for a way to strawman this instead of addressing the argument. There is little done in modern academics that legitimately drives innovation. Only select institutions, with significant ties to private industry, generate papers and innovation. Largely these are still already done in R&D at a company somewhere. Public funding for education that works is effectively subsidizing costs for private industry. Public funding that doesnt work is incompetence that benefits no one other then government employees, and that makes it equal to theft. Therefore, we remove the subsidy, and students that are worth investing in will be paid for by the billions that companies have sitting around collecting dust.

bumby 4y ago
Taxation without representation is theft. If you live in a modern western democratic society, that is not the case. In my experience, in both academia and industry, industry often gets the better deal. They can effectively socialize the risks to the public sphere and then when there's a clear path to make profits, take the reins. I think that hybrid system tends to work the best to mitigate the evils of both sides. A good example is SpaceX. There would be no SpaceX without NASA and most of the earliest flights were self-insured by the govt. Their SpaceAct agreement allows them to have access to all the support and expertise of NASA as long as they share their data. In exchange, the dinosaur of NASA has some new innovation led by the private sector. Once they proved themselves competent, their customer base expanded to private companies because the risk was now lower. I don't think any of that was likely to happen in a non-hybrid approach.

bumby 4y ago

Taxation without representation is theft. If you live in a modern western democratic society, that is not the case. In my experience, in both academia and industry, industry often gets the better deal. They can effectively socialize the risks to the public sphere and then when there's a clear path to make profits, take the reins. I think that hybrid system tends to work the best to mitigate the evils of both sides. A good example is SpaceX. There would be no SpaceX without NASA and most of the earliest flights were self-insured by the govt. Their SpaceAct agreement allows them to have access to all the support and expertise of NASA as long as they share their data. In exchange, the dinosaur of NASA has some new innovation led by the private sector. Once they proved themselves competent, their customer base expanded to private companies because the risk was now lower. I don't think any of that was likely to happen in a non-hybrid approach.