People say that the government must do what the people can’t do. Here are some examples of what the people say they can’t do:
- “We can’t” do rural free delivery.
- “We can’t” do trains in small towns
- “We can’t” do land reclamation
- “We can’t” do hydroelectric dams
- “We can’t” do weather reporting.
Thinking this way is very illogical, and out of sense, since what the state does is extract wealth from some people to be able to do what the people say they “can’t” do. So what the state is basically doing is extract the money from the people, to do what the people “can’t” do. Then, we go to the argument. The state does not have the moral right to coerce the people, if individuals don’t possess this. So, what are the limits of this coercion?
Voluntary arrangements can solve this problem, without using the politics of plunder. How? Instead of the state coercing the people, the people, voluntarily donate the money for the works to be done. Of course, there has to be responsibility over the people and the state, in order to be able to handle this in the right way.