But then you'd have to pay "government insurance" so that you could afford to pay fees for any government services you might need. Or else you'd have to pay the fees out of pocket. I know that your argument is based on morality, and not economics, but I'd like to know if you think it is possible to overcome the "free-rider" problem of voluntarily funded government services.
I know that your argument is based on morality, and not economics, but I'd like to know if you think it is possible to overcome the "free-rider" problem of voluntarily funded government services.Morally speaking, there is no free rider problem. Here's why not:
- Each person is solely responsible for his actions, and for realizing his own goals; one person's goals impose no positive duty on anyone else to see that those goals are realized.
- Benefit does not establish obligation; becoming a free moral agent with the right to Liberty obligates a person to not violate the rights of others, and to compensate others for having violated their rights; other than that, the only other way to become obligated is to exercise one's Liberty right to become a party to a contract or agreement
The fact that the 'free rider problem' may make it uneconomic to achieve one's goals is not a problem in the domain of morality. The universe does not guarantee anyone that any of their goals will be realizable, or realizable at any particular cost. Violating someone else's rights is not morally justified by need, no matter how urgent.
Taxation (or whatever) cannot be morally justified by economic considerations, any more than slavery or cannibalism can.