Quote: (04-09-2017 02:43 AM)Ouroboros Wrote:
The police and military are part of government, funded by the taxpayer. Why should wealthier members of the community part with their hard-earned cash to subsidise your security?
The police and military are arguably one of the few areas where the state rightfully belongs, to protect one group from violence against another regardless of economic status.
But even that is contentious.
Quote:Quote:
They could easily just hire their own security guards and wait it out in their gated compounds. Private security, being sourced from the private sector unlike clumsy state-owned military/policy forces, would do a far better job.
This is actually a very interesting and legitimate issue with a lot of discussion around it.
https://mises.org/blog/privatize-police
Quote:Quote:
Taking it further, why should the government protect your property rights at all? If you have worked hard enough, you ought to have enough money to pay for militias to do the job for you. After all, there is no society, only individuals, and they should look after their own interests instead of depending on a nanny state to protect them.
Quoting from the above article:
Free-market police would not only be efficient, they would have a strong incentive to be courteous and to refrain from brutality against either their clients or their clients' friends or customers. A private Central Park would be guarded efficiently in order to maximize park revenue, rather than have a prohibitive curfew imposed on innocent — and paying — customers. A free market in police would reward efficient and courteous police protection to customers and penalize any falling off from this standard. No longer would there be the current disjunction between service and payment inherent in all government operations, a disjunction which means that police, like all other government agencies, acquire their revenue, not voluntarily and competitively from consumers, but from the taxpayers coercively. In fact, as government police have become increasingly inefficient, consumers have been turning more and more to private forms of protection. We have already mentioned block or neighborhood protection.
There are also private guards, insurance companies, private detectives, and such increasingly sophisticated equipment as safes, locks, and closed-circuit TV and burglar alarms. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice estimated in 1969 that government police cost the American public $2.8 billion a year, while it spends $1.35 billion on private protection service and another $200 million on equipment, so that private protection expenses amounted to over half the outlay on government police. These figures should give pause to those credulous folk who believe that police protection is somehow, by some mystic right or power, necessarily and forevermore an attribute of State sovereignty.