I read what you said on free riders. Here why I wasn’t convinced by it.

“People not contributing to infrastructure while supporting themselves in productive ways is a far smaller problem than 50+% of people living as active monetary leeches.” I think your +50% are leeches claim is a bit dubious (you include everyone that receives a subsidy or is employed directly by the state, but there is no reason to believe a purely voluntary system of funding the government would result in that hypothetical government from having the same or similar subsidies, employment, and contractor relationships as they do now. It would only be in your choice to fund those or not) but that’s not my main beef . You aren’t claiming there is no free rider problem, only that you think it’s less of a problem than the “leeches”. I make the claim the magnitude of the free rider problem is large enough that a society of people far exceeding Dunbars number will fail to protect itself from “strong men” from using sufficient violence in their oppresive systems to subdue a purely voluntary system. That’s it. I agree with you that taxation is theft. I agree with you that it is therefore an immoral system. But it doesn’t follow necessarily that a moral system will be able to protect itself. Free riders do exist, and they always will, it’s human nature to take the free when you can get away with it. That’s why the market is filled with products you have to pay for, inorder to take possession of them. If that wasn’t an aspect of human nature then you would be able to go to any grocery store and walk out with stuff and “pay whatever you wanted” What would you expect to happen? Well I would expect that those stores would go out of business. And if a store can’t stay in business on a purely voluntary “pay what ever you would like” system then I don’t think a government would be able to either. The counter claim I would expect would be a private entity that you can pay for protection like a private military. But then you’ve basically just described the *feudal system*. And I would expect outcomes would be similar. And we are back to “strong men” using violence to subdue a purely voluntary system. I’m not happy about the result. Regardless I believe when a society far outstrips dunbars number it fails to be both moral and sustainable. (In the sense that it protects itself to continue)