Yeah, that's all well and good for Mother Goose stories, but it's not how things go down. Ever hear people talk about how cash is untraceable? That's what they mean. But go ahead. Try and tell business owners negotiating over disputed property to just stop and wait about 14 years while you trace people down that have live there in the last 212 years since the bridge was built. Or a bank that all that money is all of ours. They'll give it up, I'm sure.
The same question could be asked for all the "public" assets. Would the state not just auction off all its assets in the event of a libertarian takeover? The question then would be what happens to all the money that the state ends up with after auctioning off all their bridges, road etc.
Jack Roberts: The same question could be asked for all the "public" assets. Would the state not just auction off all its assets in the event of a libertarian takeover? The question then would be what happens to all the money that the state ends up with after auctioning off all their bridges, road etc.
Not quite, I think the way to go would be to have the state hand over its assets to a trustee while claims on property are sorted out, then an auction can be handled by an auctioneering company or the like.
The money should then be used to pay back the people who were appropriated to pay for those things, as best as can be determined.
To the guy who said something to the effect of "good luck tracking all those people down" it's really not that difficult. You publicize the fact that there's no more X-county government, those who've paid taxes to X-county government can establish their claim via public record, tax records, etc. Some clearly paid more taxes than others. You set a reasonable date for the end of filing of claims, say three years. People who miss the deadline are locked out.
It's not going to be quick or easy to disburse the ill-gotten property of the state, but that's not to say that there's not rational ways to go about it, and reasonable claims existant on that property based on who actually paid for it.
You AnCaps just want all the roads to be monopolized so that good decent hard-working folks have to pay 1000$ just to get somewhere!
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
if someone voted for funding of a bridge, would they get money back as well if that route was take, seeing as they did vote for the taxes and they did vote for the bridge. i still don't see how people can vote yes and be a victom to the yes vote at the same time, the could have not voted.
who ought to own the bridges currently owned by the government?
Whoever places the highest bid at auction, then distribute the proceeds on a pro rata basis to taxpayers as restitution.
I don't think homesteading in this case is practical or ethical. If you steal $1000 from me and use it to build some structure, is it just to then let some third party homestead it? No, it was my money, it's my structure. Since in the case of public infrastructure there are multiple claimants, the property ought to be sold and the proceeds distributed proportionally.
I'm not necessarily for (or against) privatizing public roads and bridges.
If it was to be done though, there would have to be some mechanism from preventing using government as a thug to flip land from one private entity to another.
Suggestions:
*No public land can be distributed to private individuals after X(long) amount of years.
*Former owner of land has first priority to purchase road. If they cannot afford it to purchase it, they can receive X amount of profits.
*If former owner is dead, profits for relatives can be created on a scaled basis.