Quote Originally Posted by Legend1104 View Post
I believe that, in an ideal world, a governmental system is set up with the strict purpose of protecting our life, liberty, and property.
If people ever arrived at the point where this is achievable, you won't need to use violence to fund defense services.

Whenever it exceeds these stipulations, then the taxation is theft and immoral.
Taxation is always theft. This is proven by the simple fact that it is funded through force. If it was voluntary, force would not be required.

It is true that State apologists maintain that taxation is "really" voluntary; one simple but instructive refutation of this claim is to ponder what would happen if the government were to abolish taxation, and to confine itself to simple requests for voluntary contributions. Does anyone really believe that anything comparable to the current vast revenues of the State would continue to pour into its coffers?- Murray Rothbard

It should never be expanded to build roads, infrustructure, welfare, social security, and all of the other junk. If they want roads then they either need to start a business to do it, or have a local government provide for it (talking about roads, infrustructure, and schools, not the other stuff).
If you get enough people to accept this, then it would be proof that an overwhelming majority of people have had a profound revelation. What I mean is, if most people accept the pure minarchist position, then there need not be any fear of criminal voluntary defense agencies, etc. Any corrupt defense service could not last in a society full of minarchist libertarians.

To say that 95% of the population is liberty oriented enough to achieve the voluntarization of roads, schools, social security, etc., but then claim that these very same people are too evil or ignorant to produce voluntary defense services, is a contradiction.

Another point: in my view, we are about as likely to achieve minarchy as we are to achieve anarchy. I.e., both are remote possibilities. What is striking is that almost every criticism of "impracticality" that minarchist hurl at anarchy is also true of minarchy itself. Both are exceedingly unlikely. Both require massive changes in views among millions of people. Both rest on presumptions that most people simply don't care much about.- Stephan Kinsella

If people don't like that system then (like John Locke advocated) they have the right to move somewhere else.
This neglects the question of who legitimately owns the property in the first place. If I homestead a piece of land, and then someone arbitrarily declares me under their jurisdiction, it would be absurd to call it justice that I move if I don't want to be apart of their system. Or if someone arbitrarily claims jurisdiction to land they have not legitimately acquired, then any use of violence to enforce this claim is nothing more than a criminal act.

Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
I'd like to see voluntary taxes.
This is a contradiction.

And here is Ron Paul on taxes and private defense:

The government is incapable of doing what it's suppose to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions. - Ron Paul, Liberty Defined page 70

We might reflect on how we achieve security in our everyday lives. We have locks on our doors, provided by private manufacturers. We use privately provided alarm systems. We depend on the idea that others are going to drive safely, and the incentive to do so comes from a private system of insurance. Some people own and carry guns for security. Their efforts help everyone by deterring criminality. Commercial establishments such as banks and jewelry stores hire private security guards. Malls and subdivisions have their own security apparatus. - Ron Paul, Liberty Defined pages 254-255

If we reflect on how security works in the real world, we discover a huge and important role for private enterprise, and we find that the vast government apparatus of "national security" does not keep us safe so much as threaten our liberties by regarding the entire citizenry as a threat. Private security does not threaten our civil liberties, but government-provided security does. - Ron Paul, Liberty Defined pages 254-255

A free society, valued by the people, would be adequately defend by volunteers, without age, sex, or any other restrictions. - Ron Paul, Liberty Defined page 51

If we as a nation continue to believe that that paying for civilization through taxation is a wise purchase and the only way to achieve civilization, we are doomed.- Ron Paul, Liberty Defined, Page 284 (Ron Paul has also repeatedly said elsewhere that taxation is theft )