Then it characterizes libertarian as doing only those necessary things which individuals cannot reasonably do themselves—like building an interstate highway system or fielding an army.
I don't see why federal government should be building interstates. This is the camel's nose. It's how the argument is lost... incrementally. There's a small thing ignored here. It's not just the federal government vs. individuals. That's a false choice. States should build interstates. It just requires them to cooperate.
What about funding? It doesn't come from federal government; it comes from taxpayers.
What if a state can't afford their section of the interstate? If two states want to link up through a state that can't do their part, those two states better work it out. If they bypass that poor state, that poor state can decide if they want to be a part of an interstate system.
None of this requires the involvement of the federal government. But I wouldn't object to them being part of the planning; just don't let them control any state money. Camels should be kept outside the tent where they belong.
No comments:
Post a Comment