A Point for Hard-Core Libertarians

I missed this story back in November.

Between 1989 and 2010, U.S. attorneys seized an estimated $12.6 billion in asset forfeiture cases. The growth rate during that time averaged +19.4% annually. In 2010 alone, the value of assets seized grew by +52.8% from 2009 and was six times greater than the total for 1989. Then by 2014, that number had ballooned to roughly $4.5 billion for the year, making this 35% of the entire number of assets collected from 1989 to 2010 in a single year. According to the FBI, the total amount of goods stolen by criminals in 2014 burglary offenses suffered an estimated $3.9 billion in property losses. This means that the police are now taking more assets than the criminals.

It was picked up by the WaPo wonkblog and more recently by the AEI blog, where I finally saw it.

My general outlook on libertarianism is that on a case-by-case basis, I generally agree with libertarian inclinations. However, I try to push back as much as I reasonably can against the unrelenting anti-government line taken by hard-core libertarians.

But the data point quoted above fits awfully well with the hard-core libertarian narrative, which is to model government as a gangster organization. In addition, I would point out that the asset-seizure is really penny-ante stuff compared with the “settlements” that attorneys general and regulatory agencies reach with corporations that they shake down. (Oh, and speaking of shakedowns, there is this). And, of course, even those are penny-ante stuff compared with tax collections, so if you think that taxation equals theft. . .

I like to use the “bake sale” thought experiment. You may have seen the bumper sticker that says “it will be a great day when the Pentagon has to hold a bake sale to fund a bomber.” In fact, I think it will be a great day when all government agencies have to rely entirely on voluntary contributions. That would make each government agency just another form of non-profit organization. So go ahead and make the Pentagon fund itself with bake sales–but do the same thing with the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, the EPA, etc. My guess is that if government agencies had to compete for funds with other non-profits, the agencies would learn to be a lot more effective and a lot more customer-oriented.

9 thoughts on “A Point for Hard-Core Libertarians

  1. On my drive I was pondering what is government and cops, really? Perhaps its just a geographical monopoly we grant low accountability.

    They shoot way more dogs than people because there is almost zero accountability for killing your dog. They’d kill you, but there is slightly more accountability. I think of cops lost on the order of a day’s pay for killing the dog the dog killing would be nearly eliminated.

  2. Is there a historical example of voluntary demilitarization (in very broad sense, including all forms of monopoly on violence)?

    Germany, Japan are generally pacifist, but that was brought by WW2 defeat.

  3. A good move towards this would be allowing 100% Tax Credits to specific gov’t agencies. Every IRS form should have the prior year’s Federal gov’t expenditure categorized with percentages spent (and an “Other” for everything else).
    WikiP:
    3.2 United States Department of Agriculture
    3.3 United States Department of Commerce
    3.4 United States Department of Defense
    3.5 United States Department of Education
    3.6 United States Department of Energy
    3.7 United States Department of Health and Human Services
    3.8 United States Department of Homeland Security
    3.9 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
    3.10 United States Department of the Interior
    3.11 United States Department of Justice
    3.12 United States Department of Labor
    3.13 United States Department of State
    3.14 United States Department of Transportation
    3.15 United States Department of the Treasury
    3.16 United States Department of Veterans Affairs
    Plus a special line for Social Security (37% of the budget).

    Giving folks the choice to donate their own taxes would encourage learning a lot more about how the gov’t spends the money, and could give more guidance to the politicians.

    I could imagine a “direct democracy” in gross allocation of funds, reducing the power of gov’t pork.

  4. Now who thinks this is because we want more government and who thinks it is because we want less taxes? Who thinks this is because we want government to work better and who thinks this is because we want it not to work at all? Or markets in government path of least resistance?

    • It is not because of any of that. It is a disconnect between what voters want and how that go corrupted by the time it ended up in the ultimate incentive structure presented to law enforcement. Just like nobody thinks killing your dog is a good idea, even the guy doing it, but he can, and why not?

  5. A country cannot have its soldiers begging for weapons. It is a stupid idea, conceivable only in utopia.

Comments are closed.