In her essay “Government Financing in a Free Society”, which can be found in The Virtue of Selfishness, Ayn Rand says:

In a fully free society, taxation—or, to be exact, payment for governmental services—would be voluntary. Since the proper services of a government—the police, the armed forces, the law courts—are demonstrably needed by individual citizens and affect their interests directly, the citizens would (and should) be willing to pay for such services, as they pay for insurance.

Many people would probably scoff at this idea.  They would find it difficult to believe that enough people (or any people perhaps) would voluntarily give money to the government.  The prevailing view of the “rich” and corporations seems to be that, if given a choice, they would take all they could and leave the “99%” holding the bag.

An article in my local paper, and I live in a small town in northern Vermont, shows the fallacy of this view.  A local resort company that is currently spending millions of dollars to expand their operations is apparently offering to give money to the government, specifically Customs and Border Patrol, to ensure there are sufficient customs officials at the local border crossing in North Troy, VT.   This is part of a pilot program which allows, not forces, private companies to augment federal funding of existing ports of entry to ensure there are enough officers to keep things flowing smoothly.

According to the online edition of the Orleans Record:

Stenger [ed: Bill Stenger, president and CEO of Jay Peak Resort] said that the federal government should make sure that the ports flow smoothly.

But he said the investment of private money into a federally run port would be worth it.

“I can’t afford a half-hour wait and I can’t afford an unwelcome border.”

According to the Associated Press, it is not just a resort in Vermont that wants to do this.  The Miami airport and several locations along the border between Texas and Mexico are among the locations that also want to take part in the program.

This gives evidence to me that if the government were restricted to its proper functions of protecting individual rights, and border control falls within that definition, people would certainly give money to fund its activities.   I know I would have no trouble giving money towards: national defense (but not international policing), rights respecting local police, and an objective justice system.

And, because I like his videos, here is Yaron Brook on the same subject: