<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/feed/bypass/styles/feed.css" media="screen"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/feed/bypass/styles/feed.xsl"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">

	<channel>
	  <!-- main channel info -->
        <title>Defense without taxes </title>
        <link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/topic/377/t/Defense-without-taxes.html</link>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[ When Dr. Ruwart issued her tax day message, one objection I saw expressed by some people was about financing national defense.  Financing defense voluntarily
is not nearly as hard as people think as long as three steps are followed:


(1) Define the problem correctly


A libertarian government (let&#39;s avoid the anarchist-minarchist debate for now: a government that doesn&#39;t aggress, doesn&#39;t tax, and allows secession
is fine with me) would consider the   protection of the people in... ]]>
        </description>

		<!-- optional elements -->
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2006, Yuku</copyright>
		<managingEditor>feeds@yuku.com (FeedMaster)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>webmaster@yuku.com (WebMaster)</webMaster>
		<!-- note: dates need to be RFC 822 formated "Sat, 07 Sep 2002 00:00:01 GMT" -->
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:33:07 GMT</pubDate>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 08:20:00 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>Yuku Feeds 1.0</generator>
		<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
		<!-- <cloud domain="rpc.yuku.com" port="80" path="/RPC2" registerProcedure="pingMe" protocol="soap"/>-->
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		<!-- feed image -->
		
		<rating>
		{pics-1.1 &quot;http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) &quot;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 ))
		</rating>
		<textInput>
			<title>Search</title>
			<description>Search Domain</description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://yuku.com/search/direct/</link>
		</textInput>
		<!-- skip
		<skipHours>
			<hour>23</hour>
		</skipHours>
		<skipDays>
			<day>Monday</day>
			<day>Wednesday</day>
			<day>Friday</day>
		</skipDays>-->
		<!-- extensions -->


		<!-- channel items -->
		<!-- descriptions should be shorter than 500 char to be polite -->
		<!-- html shoud be stripped or escaped -->
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/49/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-49</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I&#39;d start with the Philippines, leaving out Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Hawaii on that end, simply because the negatives would be too difficult to explain to
people in a brief minute.
<br>
<br>
I think you left out Haiti from the list.
<br>
<br>
Then I would throw in the unsuccessful US backed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs, the constant attempts to knock over Nicarauga, the support of a
dictatorial militarist regime in El Salvador. . . .
<br>
<br>
I&#39;d also make several spots that... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (DElibertarian)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/49</guid>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 08:20:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/48/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-48</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ A sound bite, eh?  Let&#39;s see, if we just limit ourselves to a list of the governments that the US has actually overthrown over the past century or so, and
leave out the World Wars ... hmm  ... let&#39;s try reverse order:
<br>
<br>
Iraq
<br>
Afghanistan
<br>
Panama
<br>
Grenada
<br>
Chile
<br>
Vietnam
<br>
Guatemala
<br>
Iran
<br>
Honduras
<br>
Nicaragua
<br>
Philippines
<br>
Puerto Rico
<br>
Cuba
<br>
Hawaii
<br>
<br>
Did I miss any?  If not, I&#39;ll get to work on that 30 second sound... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Less Antman)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/48</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:49:55 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/47/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-47</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I think one potentially effective way to begin to make the point about interventionist foreign policy is to provide people with the data in the form of an
annotated list or timeline of American military (as well as covert operations) interventions in the internal affairs of other countries over the past century,
and how well that&#39;s worked out for us and for them. From Central America to Southeast Asia, from Africa to the Middle East, American foreign policy
adventurism and interventionism... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (DElibertarian)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/47</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:09:06 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/46/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-46</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I&#39;ll keep it short, as well, since I should be finishing the packing right now.  We are in total agreement that the most crucial step is to persuade people
to adopt a foreign policy of non-intervention, and that the other benefits and reasonable transition steps likely will only follow a consensus commitment to
that.  I think we also agree that, in practice, the ending of formal alliances and base agreements will occur over time, not instantly.  I do, think, however,
that the key to... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Less Antman)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/46</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:56:33 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/45/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-45</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I do not have the time today for a protracted reply, but I will begin with one note: a Libertarian government does not spring into existence through immaculate
conception, and it must needs square with the US Constitution from the outset, else we are contemplating a completely different (and, I suspect, abstract)
nation.
<br>
<br>
That said, what I am referring to is your initial comment about the fact that we currently have &quot;socialized&quot; security of the sea lanes. To a
significant... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (DElibertarian)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/45</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:28:34 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/44/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-44</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I agree: these are issues libertarians must discuss intelligently. I&#39;m on a short leash before leaving for a week&#39;s vacation with my wife later today,
but let me at least give the outline of a response before we set sail.
<br>
<br>
In principle, a libertarian government that is voluntarily financed may engage in any actions that do not violate the lives and property of others. In
practice, though, the protection of shipping lanes would be far more sensibly provided for the benefit and... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Less Antman)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/44</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:25:38 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/42/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-42</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ You suggest that a Libertarian government &quot;would consider the protection of the people in its jurisdiction to be its defense responsibility.&quot; Is the
premise therefore that (a) all travel and trade abroad is conducted completely &quot;at your own risk&quot;--i.e., the government has no responsibility to
protect transportation lanes (sea lanes); and (b) that existing treaties should be instantly terminated? I think I&#39;d agree that NATO could be eliminated,
but for better or worse... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (DElibertarian)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/42</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:01:27 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/reply/41/t/Defense-without-taxes.html#reply-41</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ &quot;The US government spends nearly $1 trillion on &quot;national defense&quot; right now, while the second place country, China, spends less than $100
million, with a population more than 4 times the US.&quot;
<br>
<br>
Less, I think you mean that the Chinese government spends less than $100 <span style="text-decoration: underline; font-weight: bold;">billion</span>, not
million.
<br> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Freedhwy)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/sreply/41</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:27:54 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Defense without taxes  ]]></title>
			<link>http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/topic/377/t/Defense-without-taxes.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ When Dr. Ruwart issued her tax day message, one objection I saw expressed by some people was about financing national defense.  Financing defense voluntarily
is not nearly as hard as people think as long as three steps are followed:
<br>
<br>
(1) Define the problem correctly
<br>
<br>
A libertarian government (let&#39;s avoid the anarchist-minarchist debate for now: a government that doesn&#39;t aggress, doesn&#39;t tax, and allows secession
is fine with me) would consider the   protection of... ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Less Antman)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://ruwarchy.yuku.com/topic/377</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:33:07 GMT</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
    <!-- end items -->

  </channel>
</rss>