From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.general,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Help for California Libraries! Dire Need!
Date: 24 Jul 92 02:17:59 GMT
            <1454rkINNejt@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
            <18984@fritz.filenet.com>
            <35966@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Followup-To: ca.politics
Distribution: ca
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <35966@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>
 by marotenb@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Mark Rotenberg):

: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
:
:> Written in article <1454rkINNejt@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>
:> by carolo@cse.ucsc.edu (Carol Osterbrock):
:>
:>: [Quote on school/property taxes deleted]
:>: I'm willing to pay for them, as long as everybody else is too.
:>
:> I'm curious about this statement.  If you're willing to pay for them,
:> why do you care whether anyone else does?
:
: What a silly response!  If everybody is paying for something then the cost
: per capita decreases.  There's no contradiction in supporting a policy so
: long as it's evenly enforced!  Sheesh...

Ah!  So, let me see if I have this straight.  You see something you
think is necessary and good, so you want to pay for it.  A truly just
cause, say, feeding the poor or educating the masses.

You and 100's of people agree that this is a Just Cause, and decide that
you can pool your money at, say, $100 each.

But, in order to reduce your payment from $100 to $80, you are willing
to point guns at the heads of people who do NOT think it is necessary,
good or just?  Or, perhaps agree with you, but don't have the money 
right now? Or, perhaps agree with you, but believe they have even BETTER 
causes to support?  (Who are, in the meantime, getting ready to force 
money from YOU to support THEIR favorite causes ... which you happen to
think are loads of crock ...)

Is this right?  In other words, to save $20, you will threaten to put
people in jail for disagreeing with you?  Simply because you outnumber
these misinformed people?  (Ie, you have the majority vote.)

:> I've heard this before, so it seems to me there must be LOTS of people 
:> who are willing to pay for them.  But; why only if _everybody_ does?  
:> Why such a strange caveat?
:>
:> Why not get together with a group of interested parties and simply pool 
:> your money together?
:
: Yeah, we can form a government!

Why?  Why not just pay for the damn thing yourself?  The idea behind a
govt seems to be, from your point of view, to force people who disagree
with you into funding your favorite causes.  Tyranny of the majority,
and all that.  Similarly, they can force you into funding THEIR causes, 
a double-edged sword that is more than willing to slice both ways.

:> Since there are so many people willing to pay,
:> this should be a snap.  Of course, since we're on the subject of intro-
:> ducing "user-fees," this would be over and above what parents pay in
:> tuition, so the schools ought to get gobs of money this way.
:
: Hmmm... Taxes???  Are you trying to say that there are segments of the
: population who don't benefit from education?  Or segments of the economy?

Look at it this way.  The PRIMARY beneficiary from an education is the
STUDENT.  All else is secondary, and any real benefit to "society" is 
highly debatable.  It's also debatable whether or not "education" is
really what's happening in today's public schools, but let's assume for
now that that's not a problem.

Assume for now that "society" has MASSIVE benefits.  After all, this
wouldn't be a Just Cause otherwise, would it?  Why should I force you to
pay me for a service you didn't ask for?

Suppose I send you a check for $100.  I'll bet you'd love it.  You'd
probably have it spent inside a day.  Then I send over some goons to
force you to repay me $15/month for the next 12 months.  Not so happy 
about it now, are you?  This is essentially what you're advocating.

:> So why do you feel it necessary to force money from dis-interested parties?
:
: Who's "dis-interested" in education?  We can all sit around and suck our
: thumbs until we're senile AND immature!  Or we can improve the business
: climate (what a concept!) by offering private education for those who can
: afford it, and basic education to those who need to.  Remember that even
: a Libertarian society depends on an educated populace.

OK.

If we ALL are interested in education, then we must ALL be willing to
fund it.  Therefore, it should be a simple matter to ask for contribu-
tions.  No govt necessary.

Again, I ask.

If you are the only person willing to contribute to a cause, why do you
feel it necessary to force others along with you?  If you happen to be
in the majority, why must you force the minority?  Why will you contri-
bute ONLY if EVERYone is FORCED to contribute?  Why must YOU be forced
to contribute to a cause YOU feel requires contributions?

And finally, if we ALL are willing to contribute to the cause as you 
mentioned, why should force be necessary at all?  As I said, it should
be a snap to collect all the funding needed, and then some.

:> The Chipmunk.
:
: Forgive my occasional sarcasm!  *8^)

Hey, no problem, so long as you forgive mine!  I don't always include
smileys, so sometimes it's hard to tell.

: Mark Rotenberg
: mrote@ucsd.edu

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, batteries not included, void where prohibited.
When the government bureau's remedies do not match your problem, you
modify the problem, not the remedy.
Xref: sparky ca.general:957 ca.politics:6000