"No, you appear to miss the distinction between private, club and public goods, all of which are present in a market economy."
Which of these is exempt from paying taxes to the government entity that provides fire, police, street and various other services, while they are still benefitting from these same services?
The other poster's point was that if a business practiced discrimination and wanted to seperate themselves from societal norms, then they should not enjoy these societal provided services. Yet, no distinction was made that these same businesses would be exempt from paying for these services.
What point are you thinking that I am making? Simply, I am stating that if we don't allow someone to benefit from government services, then we should not expect them to pay for these services. That's all.
Your point is well-stated, and I agree with you --- in part: this is the MINIMALLY stringent criterion that one may want to apply. In this model, or viewpoint, police protection is a club good: those that pay taxes (members of teh club) enjoy the benefits provided, and those that do not pay taxes are excluded. This is a consistent viewpoint, I agree. But I would not want to live in such society: police protection must be a public (not club) good, and, accordingly, all citizens must pay taxes and none must be excluded from the benefits provided.