An Interesting Solution Where Both Sides Win

[wkmac]

There are those who want some degree of Statist societal controls and then there are those who prefer a society of individual freedom and liberty. These 2 schools of thought come election time clash what require great amounts of money and energy to be spent trying to defend one's turf as it were. Is there another way where bothsides get what they want? Maybe so.

Professor of Finance Mike Rozeff has suggested a unique if not radical solution to the whole problem. From Lew Rockwell:

October 21, 2008

Panarchist's answer to national debt repudiation

Posted by Michael S. Rozeff at October 21, 2008 03:38 PM


Should the federal government repudiate its debt? Suppose a party ran on a platform of repudiating the debt if they win and run the government. Does that mean they will also repudiate medicare, medicaid, social security, and prescription drug benefits too? Those are far larger in size than the national debt. Why single out the national debt? Clearly, the votes against these will exceed the votes for them. This means that there are many, many people who want the debt programs. They want big government. (National debt is 10 trillion, while medicare and the rest come to about 60-100 trillion.)
Let them have it. Let them have their government + debt + programs. Why should a liberty party take it away from them? The liberty party then imposes its values and ethics on those who disagree, and it becomes like any other rulers. The true libertarian solution to this is secession and panarchy. Those who want to be free of the big government can aim for living side by side with those who want big government. Each will have its own governance. The secession may involve some negotiations about these debts because once people secede, the debt burden per capita goes up for those left behind. But the lion's share of these debts are in program obligations like medicare and these will decline as each person opts to secede. The official debt of some 10 trillion, however, will fall on the non-seceders. They will want the seceders to pay a share. The seceders can try to get the best deal they can. Interest on the debt is about 20% of today's taxes. Seceders might be willing to pay up to a maximum of 20% of their current federal taxes to get out from under the government. Someone in a 30% tax bracket would pay 6% (at most) to continue paying off the debt at severance -- and no more no matter how much more debt the non-seceders then incurred.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/023597.html

Interesting! Liberal democrats can liberal democrat to their hearts content, empirical republicans could empire all day long and I could wear animal skins, eat raw meat and be happy in my cave!


BTW: The censored word can be found by reading the original post at the link. The word
C
U
M
in the context used means, PREPOSITION: Together with; plus.

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]We’d all be far better off dissolving the government, and if that is too radical, then limit them to marching in parades, unveiling monuments, and greeting foreign dignitaries.[/FONT]

Amen!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff233.html