Morality aside, we _are_ here to engage in debate. ;) No need to thank me.
You must clarify which public good you are speaking of before we can discuss them.
Public goods are characterised by indivisible consumption: once produced, it is impossible to exclude someone from consuming them. Examples include protection (army), clean air, lighting in the streets, etc.
That's an excellant definition, save one point: you do not restrict 'public goods' to those without which a community cannot reasonably prosper. I think that is important. For example, lighting in the streets is not, in my estimation, a necessity, though it is useful, nor is it universally used. Let us restrict the discussion to things such as the army, clean air, etc. One can choose not to visit a particular street, and thus reasonably object to paying for lights there. Not so with a military, etc.
Person acting in their self-interest will never agree to pay for a public good, so these goods cannot be supplied through markets. In one sense, the government is a company that the public hires to produce public goods. It differs from other companies in that it has coercive power.
That difference is what merits our taking an extreme position in regard to the goods the government delivers. Realistically, then, it should be limited to things which truly cannot be reasonably provided by other means. Furthermore, I think it should be restricted to those things that create liberty. A military is an obvious necessity; without a military, liberty cannot be maintained. Clean air, IMO, is really best left to local governments; there is a tradeoff in productivity vs clean air, often, and some areas are more prone to difficiulty then others, so I believe it is a matter best left to, perhaps, states.
I agree: this is coersion but acceptable one precisely because we are dealing with minors. This is different from the military service, to which people go when they reach majority. We already accept that there is, to a certain degree, a probationary period between childhood and adulthood; at 18, we hold people accountable for their crimes, allow them to vote, etc., but we do not permit them alcohol. It seems that our society, for better or worse, has in fact established an 'adult in training' stage of life.
Furthermore, if we accept that we can draft the populace in times of dire need, it follows that we can reasonably expect them to serve in the military for a brief period as a necessity of education. The simple truth is, our liberties are not free, and it becomes increasingly clear to me that a huge segment of our society is ignorant of what it takes to preserve their way of life. One needs only look toward Berkley to appreciate this.
Jokes aside, you have my respect for serving our country and for your attitude towards our armed forces.
I did nothing special; my service was in peacetime. It is often said that military service consists of six months of boredom and six minutes of stark, screaming terror. My service was during the period of boredom. But thank you for the sentiment.
Thraka
One can choose not to visit a particular street, and thus reasonably object to paying for lights there. No, one can choose to say that he would not visit that street. If he reneges on this promise, it is uninforceable.