Would you be better off if there were no taxes, no public services?

TeddyTedson

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

leonidas83

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

yes most definitely, especially with the type of government we have in power & opposition to this power

Celticfire

Plenty of people paying little or no tax already.

TeddyTedson

leonidas83 wrote: »

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

yes most definitely, especially with the type of government we have in power & opposition to this power

But what of you were to have a special needs child who required 24/7 assistance?
What would people in such circumstances do if they just couldn't afford it?

martingriff

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

True I guess but who would do the upkeep (when they do it) of water mains, sewage, parks, lights, roads, schools, hospitals.. How much would all these costs. Would you be better off (financially I mean)

MagicMarker

Stupid question is stupid.

AnonoBoy

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

ThinkAboutIt

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

No harm. We all know the only important part of the country is Dublin anyway.

Get Real

while an interesting idea, i cant see how this would work for someone on say 18000 a year with a child (maybe two) so they pay no tax, but private school costs 5000, rent costs 6000... so you,ve 9000 left to spend on food, other bills, schoolbooks, privatised transport, pay full whack if ill etc

and if you've two kids then you'd really only have 4000 euro (9000-5000 second school fee) to spend on a family of three for the entire year...which, as everything is privatised, would have to cover every aspect of life.

bbam

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

It's not that long ago since my sister paid £5000 to have a single phase dimestic supply connected to their house, late 90's maybe. And that's on a main road within 4 miles of the second town in the county.

Mr Benevolent

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

Da fuk did I just read?

Edit: The translation seems to be "Let's go back to the Middle Ages. How bad can it be?"

AnnyHallsal

No

D1stant

Salute!

The most stupid post of the week

The middle ages weren't that great tbh (and even they paid taxes)

Merch

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

Im sure the charge for a connection is way more than that, something like 15k, It was something I read last year, so I dont have a link but Im sure that info is available, i'll have a look and see.

Also OP, I doubt it, definitely some services should be privatised but others not, reduce overlap and inefficiencies, have public bodies of few experts and farm the work out to organisations on contracts for a few years for maintenance and services except critical services, Garda, Army, Nursing, but services to those could be private.

professore

Wages would be cut overnight for jobs with a surplus of applicants as employers would know people had no viable alternative to working. Competition for jobs would be fierce and people would work ridiculous hours to impress their bosses.

Unemployment would fall to 5% or less as people would be forced to work for the meager wages above ... but employers could afford to hire more people, and our economy would be super competitive.

Since there would be no-one to enforce the law, crime would skyrocket, and everyone would have a gun.

Educational standards would vary wildly since there would be no centralised body to enforce them.

Most people in the public sector would have no work.

Most admin people in the public sector would have no work.

If you got a long term illness that prevented you working you might as well kill yourself as you would end up dead anyway.

On the "plus" side, rents and house prices would be much lower.

Actually most of the above applies to the USA !!!

Pretty rough overall ...

AnonoBoy

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

that already happens

TeddyTedson

I wonder how exactly it works in places such as dubai?

There is no such thing as a stupid question ;-p

professore

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

I think you wildly underestimate the cost of your lifestyle, unless you are paying 40K + a year in tax I don't think you could have the same lifestyle you do now for less money. Would benefit the rich greatly, all the rest would be screwed.

Earthhorse

Yes, definitely, private businesses never fail (or almost never) and when they do the market quickly adjusts to fill the gaps. By contrast, governments do a lousy job of everything, because there is no incentive for them to perform better (no competition means there is no incentive). The sooner we take areas that have traditionally been the preserve of the state and transfer them to the safe hands of experienced industry heads, the better.

AnonoBoy

bluewolf wrote: »

that already happens

Oh yeah? In BRAY, Co. Wicklow?

:eek:

Merch wrote: »

Im sure the charge for a connection is way more than that, something like 15k, It was something I read last year, so I dont have a link but Im sure that info is available, i'll have a look and see.

Ah feck it. I'm not researching every stupid post I want to make in After Hours. Forget that.

AnnyHallsal

Earthhorse wrote: »

Yes, definitely, private businesses never fail (or almost never) and when they do the market quickly adjusts to fill the gaps. By contrast, governments do a lousy job of everything, because there is no incentive for them to perform better (no competition means there is no incentive). The sooner we take areas that have traditionally been the preserve of the state and transfer them to the safe hands of experienced industry heads, the better.

The bolded part is ridiculous.

martingriff

Nearly everyone is thinking about services and all that including myself but who would set the laws who would run the courts, the prisons or inforce the laws a private police force could be disatrous.

bbam

Merch wrote: »

Im sure the charge for a connection is way more than that, something like 15k, It was something I read last year, so I dont have a link but Im sure that info is available, i'll have a look and see.

Also OP, I doubt it, definitely some services should be privatised but others not, reduce overlap and inefficiencies, have public bodies of few experts and farm the work out to organisations on contracts for a few years for maintenance and services except critical services, Garda, Army, Nursing, but services to those could be private.

ESB connection is a flat fee now, think it was about €1300 to get ours about four years ago. That includes installing 3 poles and covering quite a distance with wire, near a kilometre I'd guess.

Merch

Ah feck it. I'm not researching every stupid post I want to make in After Hours. Forget that.

Neither am I thats why I said I'd look into it but with no real intention

actually I checked the eirgrid site but couldn't find anything so gave up immediately, then hoped no one would ask me how did I get on.

I actually think the figure i quoted was probably for an application and connection for wind power but anyway, what he said, i mean you

Guy:Incognito

professore wrote: »

Most people in the public sector would have no work.

Most admin people in the public sector would have no work.

Surely there would be no public sector?

ceekay74

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Roads would all be tolls. All public transport would be... er.. private I guess.
No medical benefits/child support/pensions.
But I guess you could always have insurance and take out your own pensions.
I would have more more money I feel but am much happier having these services in place even if they're not exactly run efficiently.

Private schools would sure make having kids expensive.

But just think of all the tax money you have paid over the years...

It depends what kind of income you're on. The rich would do really well. Everyone else would be screwed.

Maybe the question should be 'Would you like to live in a more extreme unequal version of the USA'

Skylinehead

No police, be grand.

JuliusCaesar

no sewers, be grand (but stinky, and pestilent)

WhatNowForUs?

The government are very bloody inefficient but this situation would take the biscuit.

Blowfish

ceekay74 wrote: »

It depends what kind of income you're on. The rich would do really well. Everyone else would be screwed.

I'm not quite sure that's true. The wealthiest rely extremely heavily on governments to keep and improve their wealth.

To use the basic example, the company currently with the largest market cap in the world is Apple. They rely exclusively on patent and copyright law to make their money. No government means no patent or copyright laws, hence any other company could copy their products.

The only way to create a company with the wealth of Apple without government would be if the company was either constantly innovating and creating new and useful products, or they come up with a way to sell their products cheaper than anyone else. Given how much both scenarios benefit consumers, personally I'd have no problem with it happening.

Skylinehead wrote: »

No police, be grand.

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

no sewers, be grand (but stinky, and pestilent)

What makes people think either of the above would be true? Both are pretty good business opportunities, it wouldn't take long before multiple companies would be competing to provide these services.

Skylinehead

Blowfish wrote: »

What makes people think either of the above would be true? Both are pretty good business opportunities, it wouldn't take long before multiple companies would be competing to provide these services.

So we pay a private company to run the Gardai.

Sounds like taxes :pac:

Blowfish

Skylinehead wrote: »

So we pay a private company to run the Gardai.

Sounds like taxes :pac:

The difference being, the Gardai have a monopoly on private security/law enforcement, where as without government, there'd be numerous companies competing for the role and you could choose between them, or even choose not to pay for private security/law enforcement at all.

RayM

Blowfish wrote: »

The difference being, the Gardai have a monopoly on private security/law enforcement, where as without government, there'd be numerous companies competing for the role and you could choose between them, or even choose not to pay for private security/law enforcement at all.

Without government, who would create the laws that these private security companies would (on behalf of those who can afford it) enforce?

Gbear

There's certainly an argument to be made for the government doing less but we need to have a neutral justice system, we need a safety net as well as various neutral regulators (healthcare, planning permission, financial). That all needs tax to pay for it and indeed, to pay for the collection of said taxes.


I can't see how healthcare run by private companies wouldn't be more cost effective.
People who can afford health insurance use that and people who can't would be covered by social security.
Everyone pays less tax, rich people who are sick pay for it and whatever tax we do have covers those who can't afford it.

It isn't about people who don't work don't deserve healthcare, or whatever other ****e - it's about the fact that competition generally leads to innovation and efficiency and that both of those are alien to public services which don't punish failure.

I think the state basically has a role where neutrality is more important than cost-effectiveness (gardaí), for a safety net or where nobody is going to be able to afford the big capital expenditure for things like motorways.

Blowfish

RayM wrote: »

Without government, who would create the laws that these private security companies would (on behalf of those who can afford it) enforce?

There wouldn't be 'laws' as such, but there are various ideas on private dispute resolution services, most likely this is theorised to be based on reputation. Some of it is covered here.

Tipp Man

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

Where are you living that you don't think this is the case already?

Sam Kade

Celticfire wrote: »

Plenty of people paying little or no tax already.

Everyone pays tax

K-9

What would we do with all the infrastructure we currently have? Something like a refund for taxes paid over the years as private companies takeover schools, hospitals, roads, garda barracks etc.

Whoever paid in most would get more I assume, a higher dividend on their higher payments.

Chuck Stone

See: Anarcho-capitalism.

It would rely on the rich to be virtuous people and freedom for the shark is tyranny for the sardine.

Adam Smith (king of the corporate 'capitalist' fanboy) said:

All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind

I don't see any reason why in the event of pure free markets a class of vile men wouldn't become the masters of mankind.

CruelCoin

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

This fee would be competed away. Wouldn't happen.

A prime example is Somalias mobile phone network.
Zero regulation, yet Somalia is possesing of the one of the worlds best mobile networks in terms of call quality, reception coverage and cost of calls.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4020259.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_Somalia

Chuck Stone

K-9 wrote: »

What would we do with all the infrastructure we currently have? Something like a refund for taxes paid over the years as private companies takeover schools, hospitals, roads, garda barracks etc.

There would be no companies. Companies are government creations. You raise an interesting point though. There would have to be a blank slate or the experiment would be tainted by public endeavour.

golden lane

everybody would pay into a private organisation to provide all the services...

then that would become the government......great idea...

AnonoBoy

Tipp Man wrote: »

Where are you living that you don't think this is the case already?

I live in my house. Never paid a connection fee in my house.

Feathers

Blowfish wrote: »

Skylinehead wrote: »

No police, be grand.

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

no sewers, be grand (but stinky, and pestilent)

What makes people think either of the above would be true? Both are pretty good business opportunities, it wouldn't take long before multiple companies would be competing to provide these services.

So like vigilante bounty hunters? Some guy stole my phone, here's a description, I'll give you €50 to get it back, no questions asked.

Pottler

professore wrote: »

Wages would be cut overnight for jobs with a surplus of applicants as employers would know people had no viable alternative to working. Competition for jobs would be fierce and people would work ridiculous hours to impress their bosses.

Unemployment would fall to 5% or less as people would be forced to work for the meager wages above ... but employers could afford to hire more people, and our economy would be super competitive.

Since there would be no-one to enforce the law, crime would skyrocket, and everyone would have a gun.

Educational standards would vary wildly since there would be no centralised body to enforce them.

Most people in the public sector would have no work.

Most admin people in the public sector would have no work.

If you got a long term illness that prevented you working you might as well kill yourself as you would end up dead anyway.

On the "plus" side, rents and house prices would be much lower.

Actually most of the above applies to the USA !!!

Pretty rough overall ...

Ok, but there must be a downside. You forgot the downside.

eth0

It'd be mighty. No property tax, live completely off the grid. Who needs governments and codology that goes along with em. Just start a culture of having people donate a 5er a month to keep the army going so the country stays our own and doesn't get invaded by another country that has a government and we'd be grand

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Thinly veiled "Lets have a Public Service bashing thread" thread.

oppenheimer1

AnonoBoy wrote: »

"Hi I'd like to get some electricity to my house please."

- "Where do you live Sir?"

"Wicklow"

- "Certainly, that'll be a 5,000 euro connection fee please."

And you know if someone wants to live in the back arse of nowhere and wants services brought to them they should carry the full cost and not have it subsidised by someone else. We might finally be able to build communities that have the critical mass to support essential infrastructure.

However an anarchist society as the OP wouldn't work. There would be no central authority to direct essential arms of the state such as police and thus society would descend into chaos. There would be no welfare and no one to do things that aren't profitable but in the greater good.

BOHtox

Corporations are people, my friend!

BOHtox

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

And you know if someone wants to live in the back arse of nowhere and wants services brought to them they should carry the full cost and not have it subsidised by someone else. We might finally be able to build communities that have the critical mass to support essential infrastructure.

However an anarchist society as the OP wouldn't work. There would be no central authority to direct essential arms of the state such as police and thus society would descend into chaos. There would be no welfare and no one to do things that aren't profitable but in the greater good.

Charities!

eth0

BOHtox wrote: »

Charities!

Also letting your friends into your house so they can go for a shag, You'd be very badly stuck before you couldn't afford to do that