6 ms·

> ust because something is good doesn't mean the tax payers should pay for it. There are other options. if you remove 'good' with 'useful', and it seems to me

by pavs 15y ago

> ust because something is good doesn't mean the tax payers should pay for it. There are other options. if you remove 'good' with 'useful', and it seems to me that this is exactly what tax payers should pay for. There are tons of useless shit tax money is used for, libraries is not one of them.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- intended 15y ago
  Wasting? How is it a waste in your opinion? Edit: You are getting downvoted, so at least you should have a chance to explain your position.
xenophanes 15y ago
You seem to have no idea what the libertarian position is. So I'll try to help: Just because something is super good and super useful -- and uncontroversially worthwhile -- like groceries, cars, delivery of packages, the production of beds, health care, retirement savings, and so on ... absolutely does not imply that the Government should be paying for it with tax money. Libertarians believe that Government is kind of like a really big bureaucratic company, except even less efficient and poorly managed in most respects, and instead of pitching investors (say) it sometimes just takes their money against their will. If something is important and we want it run well and efficiently, all the more reason to keep Government away from it. The reason to involve Government in something is when Government's unique talents and position are helpful. Most good things can be provided without Government and therefore should be provided without Government. Government has a more legitimate role to play when we need: 1) massive scale. our Government is big which is, in a few cases, an advantage 2) when we're dealing with law (courts) or force (police, military, CIA) because it's very tricky to let non-Government people do a lot in these areas
- clintjhill 15y ago
  For things that are super good, super useful but not profitable nor predisposition for voluntary support how does a community get those things? Especially those within the community whom might not afford otherwise? And especially when the lack for them causes cascading affect to the whole of the community? Seems to me an outbreak of disease by the poor surely effects the whole and that we all would do well to pay a "tax" to prevent that?
  - xenophanes 15y ago
    If you're arguing my list of Government specialties was incomplete, I agree, and contagious disease control is a great example.
- neilk 15y ago
  Government is also useful for things which have massive positive externalities. Education is the paradigmatic example. Libraries are also an example of a good where maintaining the "option to buy" is potentially more important than any service you consume. In other words, having a big pile of books in a building, available for close to no cost, enables us all to act more freely -- knowing we can get more information when we need it.
  - yummyfajitas 15y ago
    What "massive positive externalities" are created by a library? The sole benefit you describe, namely the ability to borrow books, is a private benefit. I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? Since I am the sole beneficiary, the library can charge me for it, and prevent me from consuming it if I don't pay. Why should you be forced to pay for me to receive these benefits? Should you also be forced to pay for my netflix subscription?
    - urbanjunkie 15y ago
      > I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? That actually made me feel sorry for you. Are you really this much of an island, or do you just enjoy trolling? Is there no possible benefit for me that you might have learned something, or that perhaps you might now be able to tell me something I didn't know before? Is there no benefit to me that perhaps because someone in a library showed you how to apply for your housing benefit online you didn't feel the need to break into my car? And yes, much crime like theft can be related to drugs. But a significant proportion can also be tied back to poverty. You're like a parody of all that's bad about the libertarian ethos. Or whatever you think you are.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

by pavs 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

intended 15y ago
Wasting? How is it a waste in your opinion? Edit: You are getting downvoted, so at least you should have a chance to explain your position.

xenophanes 15y ago

You seem to have no idea what the libertarian position is. So I'll try to help: Just because something is super good and super useful -- and uncontroversially worthwhile -- like groceries, cars, delivery of packages, the production of beds, health care, retirement savings, and so on ... absolutely does not imply that the Government should be paying for it with tax money. Libertarians believe that Government is kind of like a really big bureaucratic company, except even less efficient and poorly managed in most respects, and instead of pitching investors (say) it sometimes just takes their money against their will. If something is important and we want it run well and efficiently, all the more reason to keep Government away from it. The reason to involve Government in something is when Government's unique talents and position are helpful. Most good things can be provided without Government and therefore should be provided without Government. Government has a more legitimate role to play when we need: 1) massive scale. our Government is big which is, in a few cases, an advantage 2) when we're dealing with law (courts) or force (police, military, CIA) because it's very tricky to let non-Government people do a lot in these areas

clintjhill 15y ago
For things that are super good, super useful but not profitable nor predisposition for voluntary support how does a community get those things? Especially those within the community whom might not afford otherwise? And especially when the lack for them causes cascading affect to the whole of the community? Seems to me an outbreak of disease by the poor surely effects the whole and that we all would do well to pay a "tax" to prevent that?
- xenophanes 15y ago
  If you're arguing my list of Government specialties was incomplete, I agree, and contagious disease control is a great example.
neilk 15y ago
Government is also useful for things which have massive positive externalities. Education is the paradigmatic example. Libraries are also an example of a good where maintaining the "option to buy" is potentially more important than any service you consume. In other words, having a big pile of books in a building, available for close to no cost, enables us all to act more freely -- knowing we can get more information when we need it.
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  What "massive positive externalities" are created by a library? The sole benefit you describe, namely the ability to borrow books, is a private benefit. I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? Since I am the sole beneficiary, the library can charge me for it, and prevent me from consuming it if I don't pay. Why should you be forced to pay for me to receive these benefits? Should you also be forced to pay for my netflix subscription?
  - urbanjunkie 15y ago
    > I borrow a book, read it and enjoy it. What benefit does this create for anyone besides me? That actually made me feel sorry for you. Are you really this much of an island, or do you just enjoy trolling? Is there no possible benefit for me that you might have learned something, or that perhaps you might now be able to tell me something I didn't know before? Is there no benefit to me that perhaps because someone in a library showed you how to apply for your housing benefit online you didn't feel the need to break into my car? And yes, much crime like theft can be related to drugs. But a significant proportion can also be tied back to poverty. You're like a parody of all that's bad about the libertarian ethos. Or whatever you think you are.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]