4 ms·

L.P.D.: Libertarian Police Department

4 points by subdane 12y ago

tzs 12y ago
Getting evidence would be a challenge if policing were done entirely by private firms with no State granting them special authority over ordinary citizens. For instance, you suspect that I stole something of yours and have it in my house. You hire a private police force to investigate. If they knock on my door and asked me to let them come in and look around, I'll laugh at them and close the door. If they threaten to use force, the different private police force whose services I subscribe to will use force to stop your private police force. Some advocates of entirely private law enforcement/justice systems I've discussed this with tell me that this won't be a problem because my neighbors will see that I'm not letting your private police force in, and that will tarnish my reputation. Reputation will be very important in a government free society, they say, and so I will not risk that unless I'm guilty. I don't buy that...I think it is far more likely that most of my neighbors would be thinking I'm doing exactly what they would do if some jerk accused them of stealing and wanted them to let some private police force come in--worse, a private police force that has been hired by their accuser and so has a strong incentive to please him. They want him to give them a good review, so more people will hire them. Some have told me that your private police force could get a search warrant from a private court. That just pushes the problem back one level, for unless there is some State forcing me to recognize the authority of your private court, I will no more recognize your court than I recognize your police force. Every way I've thought of, or heard anyone propose, to make this actually works ends up in effect recreating a State under a different name.
- ElectronCharge 12y ago
  Libertarians recognize the necessity of a state. They simply want it to be as minimalistic and non-invasive as possible. One baby step that could be taken in the US would be to abolish the IRS and income tax, and use a consumption tax in its place. Imagine life without the annual ritual of Form 1040, and revealing every detail of your financial life. I don't believe every American should have to be an accountant, or turn their private data over to the government.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    That's a weird reply, since the parent commenter wasn't talking about tax policy. Also: I'm not sure how a gigantic tax increase on the bottom 95% of all earners is a "libertarian" concept.
    - ElectronCharge 12y ago
      The main part of the reply was disagreeing with the idea that libertarians don't want a "state". The IRS comment was just pointing out one constructive move towards a smaller, better government. The "tax increase" you mention is not an increase, read up on the Fair Tax. The prebate is designed to eliminate the potentially regressive nature of the tax. The benefits would vastly outweigh the downside.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        This FairTax? http://www.factcheck.org/2007/05/unspinning-the-fairtax/ http://www.factcheck.org/2007/05/unspinning-the-fairtax/ Even if Kotlikoff is correct that a 31.2 percent rate is revenue-neutral, there remains some reason to doubt that the rate actually would be that low. The FairTax proposal assumes a 100 percent tax base on consumption. By way of contrast, most states that have sales taxes have roughly a 50 percent tax base. With the FairTax’s 100 percent base, consumers would pay taxes on a great many things that may not intuitively seem like consumption. The list would include: Purchases of new homes Rent Interest on credit cards, mortgages and car loans Doctor bills Utilities Gasoline (30 percent in addition to current taxes, which would not be repealed) Legal fees Wow.
        ElectronCharge 12y ago
        So? There would be no federal income tax. Further, there would be no corporate income tax, so in general prices will fall and wages will rise. Money invested or saved would not be taxed, lowering the overall rate. Finally, the prebate makes up the difference for low-income folk. From the article you linked: "Moreover, even FairTax critics like Gale agree that consumption taxes increase the size of the economy. Many studies show that long-term incomes would rise under a consumption-based tax system. Optimistic accounts show a 10 percent rise in income over time, but even the more cautious studies show gains of 5 percent to 7 percent. Because the FairTax will grow the economy, workers will eventually see increases in their income." There are difficulties in implementing the Fair Tax (income tax must once again be made unconstitutional) but overall it's an extremely good idea. Imagine the gains just from the recovered productivity of everyone employed at the IRS, the myriad tax accountants, and individuals relieved from dealing with the entire mess. The billions spent on the IRS every year would also be used for something better.

4 points by subdane 12y ago

tzs 12y ago

Getting evidence would be a challenge if policing were done entirely by private firms with no State granting them special authority over ordinary citizens. For instance, you suspect that I stole something of yours and have it in my house. You hire a private police force to investigate. If they knock on my door and asked me to let them come in and look around, I'll laugh at them and close the door. If they threaten to use force, the different private police force whose services I subscribe to will use force to stop your private police force. Some advocates of entirely private law enforcement/justice systems I've discussed this with tell me that this won't be a problem because my neighbors will see that I'm not letting your private police force in, and that will tarnish my reputation. Reputation will be very important in a government free society, they say, and so I will not risk that unless I'm guilty. I don't buy that...I think it is far more likely that most of my neighbors would be thinking I'm doing exactly what they would do if some jerk accused them of stealing and wanted them to let some private police force come in--worse, a private police force that has been hired by their accuser and so has a strong incentive to please him. They want him to give them a good review, so more people will hire them. Some have told me that your private police force could get a search warrant from a private court. That just pushes the problem back one level, for unless there is some State forcing me to recognize the authority of your private court, I will no more recognize your court than I recognize your police force. Every way I've thought of, or heard anyone propose, to make this actually works ends up in effect recreating a State under a different name.

ElectronCharge 12y ago
Libertarians recognize the necessity of a state. They simply want it to be as minimalistic and non-invasive as possible. One baby step that could be taken in the US would be to abolish the IRS and income tax, and use a consumption tax in its place. Imagine life without the annual ritual of Form 1040, and revealing every detail of your financial life. I don't believe every American should have to be an accountant, or turn their private data over to the government.
- tptacek 12y ago
  That's a weird reply, since the parent commenter wasn't talking about tax policy. Also: I'm not sure how a gigantic tax increase on the bottom 95% of all earners is a "libertarian" concept.
  - ElectronCharge 12y ago
    The main part of the reply was disagreeing with the idea that libertarians don't want a "state". The IRS comment was just pointing out one constructive move towards a smaller, better government. The "tax increase" you mention is not an increase, read up on the Fair Tax. The prebate is designed to eliminate the potentially regressive nature of the tax. The benefits would vastly outweigh the downside.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      This FairTax? http://www.factcheck.org/2007/05/unspinning-the-fairtax/ http://www.factcheck.org/2007/05/unspinning-the-fairtax/ Even if Kotlikoff is correct that a 31.2 percent rate is revenue-neutral, there remains some reason to doubt that the rate actually would be that low. The FairTax proposal assumes a 100 percent tax base on consumption. By way of contrast, most states that have sales taxes have roughly a 50 percent tax base. With the FairTax’s 100 percent base, consumers would pay taxes on a great many things that may not intuitively seem like consumption. The list would include: Purchases of new homes Rent Interest on credit cards, mortgages and car loans Doctor bills Utilities Gasoline (30 percent in addition to current taxes, which would not be repealed) Legal fees Wow.
      - ElectronCharge 12y ago
        So? There would be no federal income tax. Further, there would be no corporate income tax, so in general prices will fall and wages will rise. Money invested or saved would not be taxed, lowering the overall rate. Finally, the prebate makes up the difference for low-income folk. From the article you linked: "Moreover, even FairTax critics like Gale agree that consumption taxes increase the size of the economy. Many studies show that long-term incomes would rise under a consumption-based tax system. Optimistic accounts show a 10 percent rise in income over time, but even the more cautious studies show gains of 5 percent to 7 percent. Because the FairTax will grow the economy, workers will eventually see increases in their income." There are difficulties in implementing the Fair Tax (income tax must once again be made unconstitutional) but overall it's an extremely good idea. Imagine the gains just from the recovered productivity of everyone employed at the IRS, the myriad tax accountants, and individuals relieved from dealing with the entire mess. The billions spent on the IRS every year would also be used for something better.