6 ms·
How did you get from stadium to police? The whole idea why people organize themselves in countries is to ensure internal and external safety and thus that every
by bladelessninja2 4y ago
How did you get from stadium to police? The whole idea why people organize themselves in countries is to ensure internal and external safety and thus that everyone pay taxes for police, army and courts. Everything else is an addition and in my opinion even undesired to fund by whole community - you can always organize fundraiser or start a private enterprise for such things.
- bumby 4y agoI was interesting that to some people (not me, though) a stadium is a public good and this worthy of public tax dollars to support. Just like the police or schools.
- bladelessninja2 4y agoLike you said: it's the matter of opinion, public safety, though, is not.
- bumby 4y agoThen use schools as an example. Or utilities. It’s not hinged on whether or not it’s a a safety issue, it hinges on whether it’s considered a public good.
- bladelessninja2 4y agoI have suspicion you haven't read my first comment in this thread.
- bumby 4y agoPossibly not, as it’s not inline with this. But I’m not not sure it negates the point that whether or not an individual values a particular thing does not determine if it’s a public good.
- bladelessninja2 4y agoI repeat: public safety is THE reason why we organize in countries, so police, army, justice system is in COMPLETELY different category - it is something essential, the rest is disputable. That's why you cannot compare them with, e.g. schools, there are decent countries without public education, yet, there is no serious country without police/army/courts.
- bumby 4y agoThis still does not negate the fact that citizens also organize other public goods. Just because an individual deems them non-essential does not mean they aren’t public goods. As public goods, the collective citizenry has deemed them worthy of public funding. Libraries are not safety essential, yet they are still public goods. Whether or not they are ubiquitous or “essential to safety” has no bearing on whether they are public goods anymore than it matters if a singular individual disagrees with that designation.
- bladelessninja2 4y agoI thought I was talking to an intelligent person - do you understand that "necessary" is totally different category than "nice to have"? What's the point of having libraries if they will be looted or bombarded on the very next day? How can you still don't understand that having or not having the police forces is not comparable to having or not having libraries?
- bumby 4y agoAgain, you seem to miss the point. The hierarchy of importance does not matter in determining if it's a public good. Nobody is making the point that all public goods are of equal importance. Your personal stance also does not determine whether society deems it a public good. You seem weirdly hung up on a point that is altogether centered on what seems to be your own personal definition. Something can be a low priority or non-essential or not economically viable and still be a public good. You seem determined to have an entirely different conversation but it seems to blind you to the actual points being made. Again, to answer your question, we got from stadiums to police because they are both arguably public goods worthy of tax dollars. That's not to say they are equivalent in utility or that every thinks they are worth the tax dollars spent. If you want to shoehorn a libertarian argument into the discussion it can be done in a more germane approach. Also, please review the HN guidelines.