Taxes are theft

[The Patriarchist]

I want Yandere to respond to this:

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

What if the private police force is corrupted by the mob and is better equipped then the local militia?

[The Emerald Dawn]

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

What if the private police force is corrupted by the mob and is better equipped then the local militia?

Or the fact that Internal Affairs is not something the US military should ever engage in, outside of investigating military matters.

[Divair]

This is the last thing I will respond to.

$5 says it isn't.

[Liriena]

I want Yandere to respond to this:

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

Thing is, that income tax benefits the entire country, not "people thousands of miles away". Everyone.
Your income taxes preserve your roads, keep you safe at night, educate you, and make sure that your property is legally recognized as such.
All those services would be far more expensive if provided by the private sector, and prone to the expected abuses of an unregulated market.


Bye bye!

[Venaleria]

Taxes are mostly the basis of much of the income that our country gets. The government distributes these amounts towards what we all pretty much take for granted most of the time: schools (especially), hospitals, our emergency management (fire, police departments), roads, state museums, libraries, etc. Without taxes, the country would be completely broke. I don't think we really realize (some of us...hint-hint) how well off we are compared to some countries. If you compare the US to, I don't know, say...Somalia, we practically live like gods. I think that taxes are one of the most important things helping the United States "tick". However, I do sometimes have a problem with the way they are distributed. I think the wealthy should have to pay a higher percentage of tax. For instance; Mitt Romney: $13.7 million dollars earned in 2011, having to pay 14.1% of that amount in taxes....Some people I know: $450,000 earned in 2011, having to pay 31% of that amount in taxes. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT???

[Divair]

Taxes are mostly the basis of much of the income that our country gets. The government distributes these amounts towards what we all pretty much take for granted most of the time: schools (especially), hospitals, our emergency management (fire, police departments), state museums, libraries, etc. Without taxes, the country would be completely broke. I don't think we really realize (some of us...hint-hint) how well off we are compared to some countries. If you compare the US to, I don't know, say...Somalia, we practically live like gods. I think that taxes are one of the most important things helping the United States "tick". However, I do sometimes have a problem with the way they are distributed. I think the wealthy should have to pay a higher percentage of tax. For instance; Mitt Romney: $13.7 million dollars earned in 2011, having to pay 14.1% of that amount in taxes....Some people I know: $450,000 earned in 2011, having to pay 31% of that amount in taxes. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT???

Enter key. Ever heard of it?

[Immoren]

I want Yandere to respond to this:

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

Then town is attacked by bandits with equipment comparable to conventional military unit of same size.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Taxes are mostly the basis of much of the income that our country gets. The government distributes these amounts towards what we all pretty much take for granted most of the time: schools (especially), hospitals, our emergency management (fire, police departments), roads, state museums, libraries, etc. Without taxes, the country would be completely broke. I don't think we really realize (some of us...hint-hint) how well off we are compared to some countries. If you compare the US to, I don't know, say...Somalia, we practically live like gods. I think that taxes are one of the most important things helping the United States "tick". However, I do sometimes have a problem with the way they are distributed. I think the wealthy should have to pay a higher percentage of tax. For instance; Mitt Romney: $13.7 million dollars earned in 2011, having to pay 14.1% of that amount in taxes....Some people I know: $450,000 earned in 2011, having to pay 31% of that amount in taxes. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT???

Venaleria uses BLOCK OF TEXT.
It's SUPER EFFECTIVE!
TED takes 42 damage.

[Republica Newland]

So what do you guys think about this?

How does this sound?

Voluntaryism kind of sounds right somehow.

Compulsive taxation should be reduced to the bare minimum.Other than that,there should be a free (but minimally regulated) market where you can choose between the private or the public sector.

So,to wrap it all up.Here's a concept which allows the citizens to choose how big or small their Govt is,while at the same time guaranteeing basic benefits.

Tax Phase 1
A very low tax rate is mandatory for everyone.Should be really low.Let's call this a minimum mandatory tax (MMT).This ensures the very bare minimum of public benefits (such as public roads).

Tax Phase 2
A minimum level of livelihood (MLL) will be set in place.This sets a standard for access to basic food,water,sanitation,shelter,healthcare,education,physical security,social security - so on and so forth.It reflects the citizens' basic necessities.It is universal,meaning that it's the same for everybody.The MLL is something that the government guarantees no matter what.

Now you have 3 options:

Route A: Choose not to use the public sector at all to meet MLL requirements = Pay no taxes at all. (except for the MMT)

If you choose to go this way,you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for your privately-sourced MLL. Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee your MLL (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on).

Overview: You will not receive any public benefits at all other than what is covered by the MMT.

Route B: Choose to use both the public sector and the private sector to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive.(+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive (for example you can choose public education while relying on the private sector for your healthcare).If the percentage you choose to pay as tax isn't sufficient and/or your choice doesn't fulfill MLL requirements,then you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for the rest of the benefits that are required to meet the MLL that you want to receive from the private sector.Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee the rest of your MLL requirements (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on) are met.

Overview: You will choose what you want to receive from the public sector and what you want from the private sector.Your public benefits are proportional to how much you pay.

Route C: Choose to use the public sector only to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive. (+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive.If the percentage you choose to pay as tax is sufficient AND your choice fulfills MLL requirements,then there is nothing else to prove.From this point you can source anything above the MLL either from the public or the private sector,it's up to you.

Overview: Your MLL will be guaranteed by the taxes you pay.Your benefits are still proportional to how much you pay,meaning that the rest of your taxes that aren't taken up by the cost of the MLL are publicly-sourced extras on top of the MLL (such as a more comprehensive public healthcare insurance,a larger pension for you public social security,so on and so forth) which are also chosen by you.

---

The whole system and all private companies whose products/services ensure the citizens' MLL are carefully monitored and controlled by the Government.Although their contracts can be long-term,these companies are obliged to pay the cost of their clients' publicly-sourced MLL equivalent to the Government periodically - for example - each year.At the end of each year,this is rebated back to the companies.This ensures that in the event in which such a company would go bankrupt or for whatever other reason would be unable/unwilling/whatever to ensure its clients' MLL,then its' contracts will be terminated,publicly provided MLL will replace its' services for the year,and then when the year ended the citizen would have the option of either choosing another private provider or switching over to publicly sourced benefits.

For those that can't afford even the publicly sourced MLL,the Government will take a 3 step approach:

1.Providing career conciliation/reorientation,else
2.Employment in public institutions with payment in public benefits over money so as to reach MLL (note this is actually self-sustainable),else
3.Accepting whatever the citizen can afford and funding the difference to what is needed to achieve the MLL.

Repeat as needed.

Doesn't sound too bad now does it? Not exactly the soulless free-for-all capitalist arena that you'd expect from a concept which involves such a degree of public/private market freedom and tax choice.

I award you no points, and have sent people to make sure your parents refrain from further breeding.

Deregulation has caused nothing but chaos in the economic sector, The Invisible Hand is giving the nation the finger, and I honestly have no wish to be beholden to the stakeholder's whims.

You obviously didn't read it.The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government,so you couldn't give two shits about the stakeholder's whims.

[Venaleria]

If someone steals your ball, theft.

If someone takes your money and spends it on valuable public service, not theft.

If someone takes my ball against my will, plays soccer with it, and never returns it, then it is theft. Whether or not the game is fun is irrelevant.

The government IS returning it though. Maybe not in the form of pure cash, but they are by building and providing for all the things that we use every day through those taxes that everyone pays.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I award you no points, and have sent people to make sure your parents refrain from further breeding.

Deregulation has caused nothing but chaos in the economic sector, The Invisible Hand is giving the nation the finger, and I honestly have no wish to be beholden to the stakeholder's whims.

You obviously didn't read it.The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government,so you couldn't give two shits about the stakeholder's whims.

Until the shareholders decide that they can do without those services and cancel their contract. Or are you suddenly going to move every company into the public sector completely?

[Republica Newland]

If someone takes my ball against my will, plays soccer with it, and never returns it, then it is theft. Whether or not the game is fun is irrelevant.

The government IS returning it though. Maybe not in the form of pure cash, but they are by building and providing for all the things that we use every day through those taxes that everyone pays.

I'm pretty sure the taxpayers are not happy with their money being spent on some military conflicts thousands of miles away from home we have no business going into.

[AntiSwag]

"....if a small community had a majority that wouldn't mind...."
Realistically, the majority would probably say "oh hey, someone else is got it covered, I don't have to pay"

[Condunum]

Why does he think local governments dont establish police forces?

[Divair]

The government IS returning it though. Maybe not in the form of pure cash, but they are by building and providing for all the things that we use every day through those taxes that everyone pays.

I'm pretty sure the taxpayers are not happy with their money being spent on some military conflicts thousands of miles away from home we have no business going into.

Vote more intelligently. Or run for office.

[Republica Newland]

You obviously didn't read it.The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government,so you couldn't give two shits about the stakeholder's whims.

Until the shareholders decide that they can do without those services and cancel their contract. Or are you suddenly going to move every company into the public sector completely?

When they cancel the contract,this "The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government" will pay for the publicly-sourced equivalent services for the rest of the year.After that,the citizen has the option of either choosing another private provider or the public system.Simple as that.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Until the shareholders decide that they can do without those services and cancel their contract. Or are you suddenly going to move every company into the public sector completely?

When they cancel the contract,this "The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government" will pay for publicly-sourced services for the rest of the year.After that,the citizen has the option of either choosing another private provider or the public system.Simple as that.

And when every, single, corporation decides against it? The public sector is going to get the money from...Dreamland? Is Nemo going to bring it?

[Venaleria]

The government IS returning it though. Maybe not in the form of pure cash, but they are by building and providing for all the things that we use every day through those taxes that everyone pays.

I'm pretty sure the taxpayers are not happy with their money being spent on some military conflicts thousands of miles away from home we have no business going into.

Seriously? You're really going to go into that? Because, a lot of the money isn't going into those conflicts from the military budget, and we're partially trying to get out of that right now....soooooo....

yah

[Liriena]

Why does he think local governments dont establish police forces?

Because we have already established he doesn't live in the real world, nor does he give it any consideration when he gives his opinion.


Hai!

[Republica Newland]

When they cancel the contract,this "The companies have to pay the cost of their publicly-sourced services equivalent every year to the Government" will pay for publicly-sourced services for the rest of the year.After that,the citizen has the option of either choosing another private provider or the public system.Simple as that.

And when every, single, corporation decides against it? The public sector is going to get the money from...Dreamland? Is Nemo going to bring it?

Duh.You obviously didn't read it.The public sector is parallel to the private one. You get to choose. If you want public benefits you will pay for them through taxes. Read again.

L.E.: Want no public benefits? No taxes. But you have to prove that you can afford the minimum private equivalents.

[The Emerald Dawn]

And when every, single, corporation decides against it? The public sector is going to get the money from...Dreamland? Is Nemo going to bring it?

Duh.You obviously didn't read it.The public sector is parallel to the private one. You get to choose. If you want public benefits you will pay for them through taxes. Read again.

L.E.: Want no public benefits? No taxes. But you have to prove that you can afford the minimum private equivalents.

So you'd increase overhead, increase graft, and increase monopolized services?

[Khadgar]

And when every, single, corporation decides against it? The public sector is going to get the money from...Dreamland? Is Nemo going to bring it?

Duh.You obviously didn't read it.The public sector is parallel to the private one. You get to choose. If you want public benefits you will pay for them through taxes. Read again.

L.E.: Want no public benefits? No taxes. But you have to prove that you can afford the minimum private equivalents.

So, the FDA and USDA are run tax free, or does everyone have to pay for them? What about the EPA?

[Death Metal]

So what do you guys think about this?

How does this sound?

Voluntaryism kind of sounds right somehow.

Compulsive taxation should be reduced to the bare minimum.Other than that,there should be a free (but minimally regulated) market where you can choose between the private or the public sector.

So,to wrap it all up.Here's a concept which allows the citizens to choose how big or small their Govt is,while at the same time guaranteeing basic benefits.

Tax Phase 1
A very low tax rate is mandatory for everyone.Should be really low.Let's call this a minimum mandatory tax (MMT).This ensures the very bare minimum of public benefits (such as public roads).

Tax Phase 2
A minimum level of livelihood (MLL) will be set in place.This sets a standard for access to basic food,water,sanitation,shelter,healthcare,education,physical security,social security - so on and so forth.It reflects the citizens' basic necessities.It is universal,meaning that it's the same for everybody.The MLL is something that the government guarantees no matter what.

Now you have 3 options:

Route A: Choose not to use the public sector at all to meet MLL requirements = Pay no taxes at all. (except for the MMT)

If you choose to go this way,you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for your privately-sourced MLL. Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee your MLL (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on).

Overview: You will not receive any public benefits at all other than what is covered by the MMT.

Route B: Choose to use both the public sector and the private sector to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive.(+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive (for example you can choose public education while relying on the private sector for your healthcare).If the percentage you choose to pay as tax isn't sufficient and/or your choice doesn't fulfill MLL requirements,then you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for the rest of the benefits that are required to meet the MLL that you want to receive from the private sector.Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee the rest of your MLL requirements (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on) are met.

Overview: You will choose what you want to receive from the public sector and what you want from the private sector.Your public benefits are proportional to how much you pay.

Route C: Choose to use the public sector only to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive. (+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive.If the percentage you choose to pay as tax is sufficient AND your choice fulfills MLL requirements,then there is nothing else to prove.From this point you can source anything above the MLL either from the public or the private sector,it's up to you.

Overview: Your MLL will be guaranteed by the taxes you pay.Your benefits are still proportional to how much you pay,meaning that the rest of your taxes that aren't taken up by the cost of the MLL are publicly-sourced extras on top of the MLL (such as a more comprehensive public healthcare insurance,a larger pension for you public social security,so on and so forth) which are also chosen by you.

---

The whole system and all private companies whose products/services ensure the citizens' MLL are carefully monitored and controlled by the Government.Although their contracts can be long-term,these companies are obliged to pay the cost of their clients' publicly-sourced MLL equivalent to the Government periodically - for example - each year.At the end of each year,this is rebated back to the companies.This ensures that in the event in which such a company would go bankrupt or for whatever other reason would be unable/unwilling/whatever to ensure its clients' MLL,then its' contracts will be terminated,publicly provided MLL will replace its' services for the year,and then when the year ended the citizen would have the option of either choosing another private provider or switching over to publicly sourced benefits.

For those that can't afford even the publicly sourced MLL,the Government will take a 3 step approach:

1.Providing career conciliation/reorientation,else
2.Employment in public institutions with payment in public benefits over money so as to reach MLL (note this is actually self-sustainable),else
3.Accepting whatever the citizen can afford and funding the difference to what is needed to achieve the MLL.

Repeat as needed.

Doesn't sound too bad now does it? Not exactly the soulless free-for-all capitalist arena that you'd expect from a concept which involves such a degree of public/private market freedom and tax choice.

No, this is even worse than your first plan. Taxes are a subscription fee, not a by usage fee; this is because even if you never have needed the local fire department's help, you might in the future, much like someone who had cable might not ever intend to watch a certain channel but new programming entices them. If the private fire department cannnot or will not act, or is disbanded, where can you turn but the public sector?

[Republica Newland]

Duh.You obviously didn't read it.The public sector is parallel to the private one. You get to choose. If you want public benefits you will pay for them through taxes. Read again.

L.E.: Want no public benefits? No taxes. But you have to prove that you can afford the minimum private equivalents.

So you'd increase overhead, increase graft, and increase monopolized services?

How is letting people choose any more monopolizing than letting them do it and still taking money from them even with no return?

[Republica Newland]

So what do you guys think about this?

How does this sound?

Voluntaryism kind of sounds right somehow.

Compulsive taxation should be reduced to the bare minimum.Other than that,there should be a free (but minimally regulated) market where you can choose between the private or the public sector.

So,to wrap it all up.Here's a concept which allows the citizens to choose how big or small their Govt is,while at the same time guaranteeing basic benefits.

Tax Phase 1
A very low tax rate is mandatory for everyone.Should be really low.Let's call this a minimum mandatory tax (MMT).This ensures the very bare minimum of public benefits (such as public roads).

Tax Phase 2
A minimum level of livelihood (MLL) will be set in place.This sets a standard for access to basic food,water,sanitation,shelter,healthcare,education,physical security,social security - so on and so forth.It reflects the citizens' basic necessities.It is universal,meaning that it's the same for everybody.The MLL is something that the government guarantees no matter what.

Now you have 3 options:

Route A: Choose not to use the public sector at all to meet MLL requirements = Pay no taxes at all. (except for the MMT)

If you choose to go this way,you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for your privately-sourced MLL. Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee your MLL (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on).

Overview: You will not receive any public benefits at all other than what is covered by the MMT.

Route B: Choose to use both the public sector and the private sector to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive.(+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive (for example you can choose public education while relying on the private sector for your healthcare).If the percentage you choose to pay as tax isn't sufficient and/or your choice doesn't fulfill MLL requirements,then you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for the rest of the benefits that are required to meet the MLL that you want to receive from the private sector.Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee the rest of your MLL requirements (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on) are met.

Overview: You will choose what you want to receive from the public sector and what you want from the private sector.Your public benefits are proportional to how much you pay.

Route C: Choose to use the public sector only to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive. (+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive.If the percentage you choose to pay as tax is sufficient AND your choice fulfills MLL requirements,then there is nothing else to prove.From this point you can source anything above the MLL either from the public or the private sector,it's up to you.

Overview: Your MLL will be guaranteed by the taxes you pay.Your benefits are still proportional to how much you pay,meaning that the rest of your taxes that aren't taken up by the cost of the MLL are publicly-sourced extras on top of the MLL (such as a more comprehensive public healthcare insurance,a larger pension for you public social security,so on and so forth) which are also chosen by you.

---

The whole system and all private companies whose products/services ensure the citizens' MLL are carefully monitored and controlled by the Government.Although their contracts can be long-term,these companies are obliged to pay the cost of their clients' publicly-sourced MLL equivalent to the Government periodically - for example - each year.At the end of each year,this is rebated back to the companies.This ensures that in the event in which such a company would go bankrupt or for whatever other reason would be unable/unwilling/whatever to ensure its clients' MLL,then its' contracts will be terminated,publicly provided MLL will replace its' services for the year,and then when the year ended the citizen would have the option of either choosing another private provider or switching over to publicly sourced benefits.

For those that can't afford even the publicly sourced MLL,the Government will take a 3 step approach:

1.Providing career conciliation/reorientation,else
2.Employment in public institutions with payment in public benefits over money so as to reach MLL (note this is actually self-sustainable),else
3.Accepting whatever the citizen can afford and funding the difference to what is needed to achieve the MLL.

Repeat as needed.

Doesn't sound too bad now does it? Not exactly the soulless free-for-all capitalist arena that you'd expect from a concept which involves such a degree of public/private market freedom and tax choice.

No, this is even worse than your first plan. Taxes are a subscription fee, not a by usage fee; this is because even if you never have needed the local fire department's help, you might in the future, much like someone who had cable might not ever intend to watch a certain channel but new programming entices them. If the private fire department cannnot or will not act, or is disbanded, where can you turn but the public sector?

This is exactly what I am talking about.You will turn to the public sector.That's in there:

"The whole system and all private companies whose products/services ensure the citizens' MLL are carefully monitored and controlled by the Government.Although their contracts can be long-term,these companies are obliged to pay the cost of their clients' publicly-sourced MLL equivalent to the Government periodically - for example - each year.At the end of each year,this is rebated back to the companies.This ensures that in the event in which such a company would go bankrupt or for whatever other reason would be unable/unwilling/whatever to ensure its clients' MLL,then its' contracts will be terminated,publicly provided MLL will replace its' services for the year,and then when the year ended the citizen would have the option of either choosing another private provider or switching over to publicly sourced benefits."