Ron Paul bill to allow Americans to opt-out of govt. run programs.

[jimw0123]

I think Ron Paul and all Republicans should sponsor a bill that will allow Americans to opt-out of any government run programs. It is the dream of Republicans to not be apart of any govt. run program, so I believe they should get that wish. I think that most Democrats would be on board with this as well. If you don't want to pay taxes for Govt. run programs than you shouldn't have to. You can opt out of it and pay less taxes. Those that want the programs would pay more taxes and become members of the program. We would only need a system to to identify those that can use the programs and those that can't because they opted out. Being a Democrat I would support this bill. I believe the govt. shouldn't force any Americans to have to pay into programs they don't want to be part of. I think if Ron Paul creates this bill and carries this message into the next election, he would have a real chance of winning the Presidency. This is the fairest compromise of all on all legislation for govt run programs. The fear of govt. making people pay for programs they don't want will be erased forever. Let's get this legislation passed so we can finally go back to becoming one nation again where everyone gets to pursue their own happiness.

[Cowlesy]

Jim - Welcome to RonPaulForums.com :)

[rp08orbust]

I think Ron Paul and all Republicans should sponsor a bill that will allow Americans to opt-out of any government run programs. It is the dream of Republicans to not be apart of any govt. run program, so I believe they should get that wish. I think that most Democrats would be on board with this as well. If you don't want to pay taxes for Govt. run programs than you shouldn't have to. You can opt out of it and pay less taxes. Those that want the programs would pay more taxes and become members of the program. We would only need a system to to identify those that can use the programs and those that can't because they opted out. Being a Democrat I would support this bill. I believe the govt. shouldn't force any Americans to have to pay into programs they don't want to be part of. I think if Ron Paul creates this bill and carries this message into the next election, he would have a real chance of winning the Presidency. This is the fairest compromise of all on all legislation for govt run programs. The fear of govt. making people pay for programs they don't want will be erased forever. Let's get this legislation passed so we can finally go back to becoming one nation again where everyone gets to pursue their own happiness.

There's a term for this: Voluntaryism.

[Flash]

Yes, it sounds like voluntaryism is your philosophy. There are plenty of Voluntaryists here you can talk to.

Two good Voluntaryist websites:
www.Mises.org
www.FreeDomainRadio.com

[Bman]

But what would Government do if it couldn't throw people in jail for not doing what they are told to do?

[tremendoustie]

I think Ron Paul and all Republicans should sponsor a bill that will allow Americans to opt-out of any government run programs. It is the dream of Republicans to not be apart of any govt. run program, so I believe they should get that wish. I think that most Democrats would be on board with this as well. If you don't want to pay taxes for Govt. run programs than you shouldn't have to. You can opt out of it and pay less taxes. Those that want the programs would pay more taxes and become members of the program. We would only need a system to to identify those that can use the programs and those that can't because they opted out. Being a Democrat I would support this bill. I believe the govt. shouldn't force any Americans to have to pay into programs they don't want to be part of. I think if Ron Paul creates this bill and carries this message into the next election, he would have a real chance of winning the Presidency. This is the fairest compromise of all on all legislation for govt run programs. The fear of govt. making people pay for programs they don't want will be erased forever. Let's get this legislation passed so we can finally go back to becoming one nation again where everyone gets to pursue their own happiness.

I support this idea completely. I believe it's wrong in general to use aggressive force to take people's property (or for any other reason). In other words, I believe force should only be used for self-defense, or defense of innocents. Your proposal would go a long way towards making government voluntary, rather than coercive.

I do question, however, your belief that most Democrats would support this. I don't even think most republicans would support it -- you know a lot of them are going to want to force you to fund the "war on terror" at least, and guantanamo ;).

I certainly laud you for your position, though. I wish every Democrat (heck, every citizen) shared your views. Perhaps most will, someday -- I do think free choice of this kind -- the freedom to support efforts you believe in with your own life and finances -- is the way of the future.

Also, welcome to the forums :)

[Kotin]

voluntaryism is the way to go.

[jimw0123]

I'm only talking about government run programs for the people. Medicare, Welfare, Libraries, Fire Departments, etc. You can opt out of these. Maybe even wars. If you are against the Wars in the Middle East maybe opt out of those too. The laws will stay the same.

[Chester Copperpot]

Hurrah!!! Im all for it

[jimw0123]

Reading about Voluntarism on Wikipedia. It sounds a little extreme to me, I don't think that's what I'm saying. Just talking about government run programs. If some people want them then they should get them. If some people don't then they shouldn't have to pay for them.

[TonySutton]

Reading about Voluntarism on Wikipedia. It sounds a little extreme to me, I don't think that's what I'm saying. Just talking about government run programs. If some people want them then they should get them. If some people don't then they shouldn't have to pay for them.

Welcome to the forums, can you tell me one government run program that outperforms its private equivalent?

[xd9fan]

this man is a fucking saint.......

letting me get off the titanic of SS and medicare

as an Xer its just a tax to be an american nothing more

[rp08orbust]

Reading about Voluntarism on Wikipedia. It sounds a little extreme to me, I don't think that's what I'm saying.

I'm sure it sounded extreme to all of us at first, myself included, which is why I was a minarchist for 10 years first ;)


Just talking about government run programs. If some people want them then they should get them. If some people don't then they shouldn't have to pay for them.

If the government does not enforce itself as a monopoly in any area and does not fund itself through theft, then in what sense is it still a state government?

[Bruehound]

I don't think is even necessary to preach/teach "voluntarianism". Just make it quick, easy and relatable for people and say to them that if government programs are so good, then you should be able to decide whether or not you wish to participate. Keep it simple.

[Zippyjuan]

I do have a question on Ron Paul and the opting out issue. He also says he would honor the commitments made to those who presently qualify for things like Social Security and Medicare (who does he consider "qualified"- just those already retired? Those over 50 or 40 who have been contributing for over 20 years already?). If you allow "young people" as he says to opt out of paying in, how do you continue to honor payments already promised? If you did not want to increase the deficit (another thing he would like to get rid of and I certainly agree with that idea) what do you cut or raise taxes on? That was about $650 billion last year alone. Social Security taxes were over $900 billion. That is a lot of money to make up from someplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

The theory is great- everybody, young and old, are happy but how do you actually pull it off?

[Met Income]

I do have a question on Ron Paul and the opting out issue. He also says he would honor the commitments made to those who presently qualify for things like Social Security and Medicare (who does he consider "qualified"- just those already retired? Those over 50 or 40 who have been contributing for over 20 years already?). If you allow "young people" as he says to opt out of paying in, how do you continue to honor payments already promised? If you did not want to increase the deficit (another thing he would like to get rid of and I certainly agree with that idea) what do you cut or raise taxes on? That was about $650 billion last year alone. Social Security taxes were over $900 billion. That is a lot of money to make up from someplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

The theory is great- everybody, young and old, are happy but how do you actually pull it off?

I didn't promise it, so it's not my problem. The lesson will be learned, don't make deals with the devil, because you might get burned.

[Mini-Me]

I do have a question on Ron Paul and the opting out issue. He also says he would honor the commitments made to those who presently qualify for things like Social Security and Medicare (who does he consider "qualified"- just those already retired? Those over 50 or 40 who have been contributing for over 20 years already?). If you allow "young people" as he says to opt out of paying in, how do you continue to honor payments already promised? If you did not want to increase the deficit (another thing he would like to get rid of and I certainly agree with that idea) what do you cut or raise taxes on? That was about $650 billion last year alone. Social Security taxes were over $900 billion. That is a lot of money to make up from someplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

The theory is great- everybody, young and old, are happy but how do you actually pull it off?

Heh...here's a better question: Regardless of whether young people can opt out or not, how do you continue to honor payments already promised? ;) Strictly speaking, that train has already left the station anyway.

[jbrace]

Social Security can be compared to a ponzi scheme. I don't want , to be apart of it, but I am FORCED to pay into a program. Not only am I forced to pay into, but I wont see a dime of the money I've spent.

[silverhandorder]

I like OP, this is my philosophy. I bet government programs would drastically improve if we allowed people to opt out.

In any case about opting out of SS. I think if young people will not pay into SS that would be pretty damning of SS. However people who paid into SS should at least get their money back, even if it means we all have to pay a temp tax for that. I know some people here would object.

[Fr3shjive]

I do have a question on Ron Paul and the opting out issue. He also says he would honor the commitments made to those who presently qualify for things like Social Security and Medicare (who does he consider "qualified"- just those already retired? Those over 50 or 40 who have been contributing for over 20 years already?). If you allow "young people" as he says to opt out of paying in, how do you continue to honor payments already promised? If you did not want to increase the deficit (another thing he would like to get rid of and I certainly agree with that idea) what do you cut or raise taxes on? That was about $650 billion last year alone. Social Security taxes were over $900 billion. That is a lot of money to make up from someplace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

The theory is great- everybody, young and old, are happy but how do you actually pull it off?

I agree. How do we do it without screwing the millions of people who already paid into these programs? Possibly by allowing kids who are entering the workforce to opt out of social security or pay much less than what your average person pays.

Im not sure what the answer is and I like the idea BUT how can we do it without leaving A LOT of people to hang out to dry?

[MurrayMe]

I would be in support of this bill.

[ghengis86]

http://www.voluntaryist.com/

[haaaylee]

I'm only talking about government run programs for the people. Medicare, Welfare, Libraries, Fire Departments, etc. You can opt out of these. Maybe even wars. If you are against the Wars in the Middle East maybe opt out of those too. The laws will stay the same.

I don't know how you would opt out of a war though, except to be exempt from a Draft if it came to be.

I mean, if religious people can opt out of social security and healthcare -- why can't everyone?

This is a fantastic idea for a bill, we should all lobby Ron to write a Resolution.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Opting out of Federal income tax would be awesome! But still, the Federal government needs some money to operate. Perhaps an optional "opt in" program would work. That got me thinking that this might be a good educational and political tool.

So here is the idea: have a survey that lists ALL the federal agencies, their budgets and a brief description of what they do. Keep in mind that most Americans have never heard of 95% of the agencies out there. Then have people enter how much Federal income tax they paid last year. Go through the list and enter how much of that tax they would like to go to each specific agency. Have an option for I want to keep this much myself. Get enough people to take this, with no personal information collected - but perhaps catch an IP address to prevent double voting, and after a while you would have a pretty good list of what agencies and programs people approve of paying for and which they find objectionable.

On the back end, shrink total budgets as a percentage of the amount of total tax revenue collected - ie: if 10% of fed taxes collected is represented by people filling out the survey, divide each agencies budget by 10. Comparing this number to how much people voluntarily wanted to contribute to that specific agency would be quite telling... Provide the results to elected officials.

It not only educates people about how HUGE the government is, how their tax dollars are spent but also how much people agree or disagree with how their elected officials are spending their money vs how they would like it spent.

comments?

-t

[stilltrying]

I'm only talking about government run programs for the people. Medicare, Welfare, Libraries, Fire Departments, etc. You can opt out of these. Maybe even wars. If you are against the Wars in the Middle East maybe opt out of those too. The laws will stay the same.

Can we opt out of the drivers license program? My mother is a beautician, can she opt out of this license as well and still cut hair? If so HOORAY!

[tremendoustie]

Reading about Voluntarism on Wikipedia. It sounds a little extreme to me, I don't think that's what I'm saying. Just talking about government run programs. If some people want them then they should get them. If some people don't then they shouldn't have to pay for them.

The description of voluntaryism on wikipedia might not be entirely accurate. It says, for example, that voluntaryists oppose voting, when I and many other voluntaryists I know support voting. It has a lot of other stuff I don't really agree with.

What you describe is really what I mean by voluntaryism, and what most voluntaryists I know mean -- that is, people have the right to use their lives and their finances as they choose, as long as they don't harm others. All organizations, including government, should receive money from those who support them, and choose to participate -- not by force or extortion.

Labels aren't really important -- ideas are. The Non Agression Principle is my basic political philosophy -- which is simply the belief that aggressive violence is immoral. I'd happily subscribe to many government programs -- the fire department certainly, to take one example. I'd also happily contribute to a fund that would pay for the education of kids with poor parents.

The idea behind many government programs is great -- we should help the poor, we should fund environmental conservation efforts, we should invest in education, and alternative energy, etc. The problem comes when these things are funded by force. Then, people loose the capability to hold the programs accountable. I know, for example, that corn ethanol is a very poor alternative energy source. The powerful corn lobby, however, has gotten the government to give them the lion's share of funding. If I were free to choose what to support, I'd move my money towards a more promising research field. I can't, though, which means the program can become extremely corrupt and wasteful, and I can do little to nothing about it.

When people are free to withhold funding, organizations are forced to be efficient and effective.

[tremendoustie]

Can we opt out of the drivers license program


The road issue is a sticky one ;). I'd be happy to let the road system go on as is for the near future -- it's really the least of our problems. Ultimately, though, it should be run by community organizations which receive funding by toll, subsctiption, donation, advertising, or other voluntary means.

If you want to drive on a road owned by a particular community organization, you'd have to fulfill their licensing requirements. I am sure a lot of it would become standardized -- just as ATM cards are standardized..



My mother is a beautician, can she opt out of this license as well and still cut hair? If so HOORAY!

Absolutely she should! This is something we should do tomorrow -- if you want to open a business, go for it. If someone wants to pay you money to cut their hair, that's between you and them -- no one else has the right to force you to get their permission to do so.

[Mike4Freedom]

Opting out of Federal income tax would be awesome! But still, the Federal government needs some money to operate. Perhaps an optional "opt in" program would work. That got me thinking that this might be a good educational and political tool.

So here is the idea: have a survey that lists ALL the federal agencies, their budgets and a brief description of what they do. Keep in mind that most Americans have never heard of 95% of the agencies out there. Then have people enter how much Federal income tax they paid last year. Go through the list and enter how much of that tax they would like to go to each specific agency. Have an option for I want to keep this much myself. Get enough people to take this, with no personal information collected - but perhaps catch an IP address to prevent double voting, and after a while you would have a pretty good list of what agencies and programs people approve of paying for and which they find objectionable.

On the back end, shrink total budgets as a percentage of the amount of total tax revenue collected - ie: if 10% of fed taxes collected is represented by people filling out the survey, divide each agencies budget by 10. Comparing this number to how much people voluntarily wanted to contribute to that specific agency would be quite telling... Provide the results to elected officials.

It not only educates people about how HUGE the government is, how their tax dollars are spent but also how much people agree or disagree with how their elected officials are spending their money vs how they would like it spent.

comments?

-t

Our Federal Income Tax only goes to paying off interest on the national debt. Nothing more.

[xd9fan]

this bill would be too much freedom