Many (most?) people have little imagination, and cannot imagine a world that is different than it is now. As a result, many people can't imagine alternatives to existing government programs. In addition, even though every government program allows multitudes to fall through the cracks, they are nominally universal in nature. Finally, most government programs are "free" to their recipients (even though they frequently are exorbitantly expensive to operate).
Therefore, when libertarians talk of ending government programs, non-libertarians can't imagine anything that would take their place, and if they can, they think that such programs will be discriminatory, and highly costly.
Consequently, I think that libertarians should focus on providing free, universal, _voluntarily_ financed alternatives to government programs. For example:
Universal Free Healthcare Foundation
Universal Free School Foundation
Universal Free Housing Foundation
Universal Free Food Program
Every program would be open to anyone, and free to the program participants.
We should then lobby the government to allow taxpayers to see what percentage of their tax payment goes to each government agency, and let them redirect their share of the tax money from the government agency to the free, universal charity of their choice in the same sector. For example, if the per capita amount spent on education is $5000, then each citizen of voting age would get to allocate the equivalent amount to the education charity of their choice (which might be the existing government bureaucracy). Any amount redirected to an external charity would be deducted from the government agency's budget.
The total tax burden would remain the same, as would the amount allocated to each sector. Every citizen would get the same amount to allocate.
While not ideal from a libertarian perspective, it would allow for refactoring of government services away from hidebound government agencies, to better performing non-profits.
Once that was demonstrated to work, then could lobby for each citizen to be allowed to not just choose which agency within a sector gets the money, but which sector. For example, if you believe that war spending is excessive, you could redirect the money from the military to education, healthcare, or whatever your priority is.
If progressives argued that citizens would make dumb allocations, we could attack them for being anti-democratic. They can't attack us for being selfish, because the total tax burden would remain the same.
Therefore, when libertarians talk of ending government programs, non-libertarians can't imagine anything that would take their place, and if they can, they think that such programs will be discriminatory, and highly costly.
Consequently, I think that libertarians should focus on providing free, universal, _voluntarily_ financed alternatives to government programs. For example:
Universal Free Healthcare Foundation
Universal Free School Foundation
Universal Free Housing Foundation
Universal Free Food Program
Every program would be open to anyone, and free to the program participants.
We should then lobby the government to allow taxpayers to see what percentage of their tax payment goes to each government agency, and let them redirect their share of the tax money from the government agency to the free, universal charity of their choice in the same sector. For example, if the per capita amount spent on education is $5000, then each citizen of voting age would get to allocate the equivalent amount to the education charity of their choice (which might be the existing government bureaucracy). Any amount redirected to an external charity would be deducted from the government agency's budget.
The total tax burden would remain the same, as would the amount allocated to each sector. Every citizen would get the same amount to allocate.
While not ideal from a libertarian perspective, it would allow for refactoring of government services away from hidebound government agencies, to better performing non-profits.
Once that was demonstrated to work, then could lobby for each citizen to be allowed to not just choose which agency within a sector gets the money, but which sector. For example, if you believe that war spending is excessive, you could redirect the money from the military to education, healthcare, or whatever your priority is.
If progressives argued that citizens would make dumb allocations, we could attack them for being anti-democratic. They can't attack us for being selfish, because the total tax burden would remain the same.