User fees are taxes, they just aren't universal. Everything else I said is in that context.
> So what is inefficient about them?
Read the archives. I talk all the time about how taxes are inefficient, which is why you need to have just one tax: a progressive income tax. You can't have zero taxes, so the next best thing is to have one.
[WS:] This is arguably one of the oddest arguments you have made, Jordan. I can agree with most of what you say on gun ownership, and I see some valid points in your take on the health care system, but this stuff is just plain weird.
>From an economic point of view, tax is merely a price of public goods - not
fundamentally different than pricing of private goods. The only difference
is who collects it - the government or the private vendor. That difference
is mostly semantic and ideological.
For example, if you pay a private insurance premium on your car (which is mandated by law) it is called "price" of your insurance and considered "kosher" in the neo-liberal creed. However, if you pay premiums on your old age insurance called Social Security (also mandated by law), it is called "tax" and consider an anathema in the neo-liberal creed.
If you pay monthly premiums on your privately owned satellite programming, it is considered "price" and subject to all the wonderful benefits accorded by the market in the neo-liberal creed. If, on the other hand, you pay "television fee" for the BBC programming in the UK (or public television in other EU countries,) it is called "tax" and an abomination of the worst kind according to the neo-liberal mantra.
If you pay a flat fixed fee in a privately owned all you can eat restaurant, privately owned telecommunication company, or privately owned time-share - again you are witnessing the wonders of the market at its best, according to the neo-liberal gurus. However, if you pay a fixed tax for the roads, health care, or transportation provided by government, it becomes the dreaded t-word to be avoided at all cost by the luminaries of the neo-liberal faith.
If you were a neo-liberal guru, Jordan, I would understand your position on taxes and simply ignored it because such gurus, like any other high priests and missionaries, are full of shit that is impenetrable to reason. But you are not, hence my question:
What in your view makes government imposed fees for goods and services (aka "taxes") in-efficient, but privately collected fees for goods or services (aka "prices") efficient. Or are you perhaps arguing that all prices (public and private) are inefficient and thus should be abolished (free stuff for everyone, etc.)? Or what?
Wojtek