| | Daniel,
I see what you mean now. I misunderstood the concern regarding the "free rider problem" in the context of post 11 by Eric, that is, in terms of what obligations does the civilians who do not join the military owe to the military. The problem you cited is a question of how the military (or any government function) should be financed, not really whether there should or should not be a compulsory draft. I am not interested in initiating another thread so I will try to answer it here the best I can.
First, I do not buy the premise that there will not be enough money to finance the military if it was financed through voluntary means. It is true that the majority of citizens may probably not choose to pay the military for whatever reason, as I conceded in post 12. I also wrote in post 12 that it will be a minority who will pick up the tab, the minority that has always had to bear the weight of the world upon their shoulders: the rich and productive. It may not be in the "short-term interest" (for lack of a better word) for the majority to put up money, or at least not much. But the rich, who have so much to lose if there is not an adequate military to defend them, would for it is in their "long-term interest" (again, for lack of a better word). I have been involved in high finance long enough to know that what seperates the rich from the middle and lower class is long-term planning in their investments. The wealthy got wealthy because they were willing to forsake a few immediate comforts for greater rewards in the future. Not all investments are measured in dollars and cents. I have an anecdote of a multi-millionaire who sold his condo at a financial loss because the association voted not to allow him to keep his dogs inside.
I can predict this with much confidence because, in America alone, billions of dollars are poured into charities and non-profit organizations every year. I cannot cite specific percentages but I remember reading in a finance textbook that the bulk of that money comes from a small percentage of the population: the most affluent members of society, of course. Many millionaries and billionaires even put up sizable percentages of their estate into private trusts and endowments of their own making. Some of them do it through the private businesses that they run or have influence with. That is in spite of the tax burdens and regulatory hurdles they have to face running their businesses (or however it is they made their fortunes). Many of these foundations fund causes that are a lot less essential than the security of the nation. Many of my colleagues in the military, in spite of their modest incomes, are paying members of organizations like the VFW and the American Legion, all private organizations that are military-oriented. In spite of the small percentage of people who qualify to be members of such organizations, they have amassed quite a chunk of change from membership fees alone. That is how things stand here and now. Imagine, then, an Objectivist society where taxes and regulations do not exist, and where the appreciation of life and liberty is more common. Also, in this society, the military (and the government in general) would not be the bloated bureaucracy it is now burdened with committments it should not have been involved. But, I digress, for I go into this "perfect world" you rather I did not appeal to.
Say, though, that my predictions are dead wrong and there are not enough people (or rather not enough people with the big bucks) who realize it is not in their rational self-interest to have the military crumble. They much rather have a few dollars now than the loss of life and liberty later. Well, it is harsh to say but they got the government they deserved. Like I wrote in my first post, any war that cannot be fought with an all-volunteer force is not a war worth fighting. To paraphrase that, any country that cannot raise an all-volunteer force is not a country worth defending. America went to two such countries not too long ago and took part in blasting their armies to the four winds.
I will close by adding that there was a time in America's history where the government treasury was quite modest (they did not have the power to collect taxes, not that they would really want to considering it was one of the things they were fighting against) yet they defeated a military world superpower in battle. The soldiers of the Continental Army and Navy were not paid much, sometimes not even at all, yet there were enough brave patriots to rise to the call to defend their inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. This war was the War for Independence, sometimes called the American Revolution.
|
|
