opt out?

[Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>]

Dear visionaries,

The issue is not whether we should have to pay for asphalt that covers
streets we never drive on. Collective societal action cannot be one vast
time-share arrangement.

The question is actually what criteria should we use to determine what
sorts of activities can be applied to all of us in this way. We all agree
on the street lights. Would we all agree if the government (local, state,
or federal) started publishing a newspaper? If they published a newspaper
that contained (surprise!) daily editorials praising the wisdom and
insight of the current administration, would it be unreasonable to ask to
opt out of that?

I once asked Bill Hall why he supported government control of education
and opposed government control of newspapers. He said that he did so
because education was so important. But does this mean that the
government should only be prohibited from controlling the flow of
unimportant information?

I am willing for the government to control the flow of water, broken
pumps or not. I am willing for them to control the flow of traffic. I am
not willing for them to control the flow of information. But if
you differ with this, and think that they should be allowed to control
the flow of information, then why not a public newspaper? And would I be
allowed to opt out?