I would seriously hope the, "they could just kill them" comment was you being sarcastic. If it isn't, you should really thing of the implications of killing thirty percent of the people.
How many of those 30% are productive? Probably most if not all. What kind of economical ramifications would result of the killing of a large percent of productive people? Probably something huge. Even if they thought they could just import more labor via Mexico or wherever; that labor isn't going to be skilled with experience, so the usefullness of anybody new taking over those jobs would be miniscule for at least three years time. DO you really think they woul dbe willing to sacrifice 3 years of prosperity for some nonsense which still wouldn't have accomplished anything because they would then have more people doing nearly the very same thing as the people they killed.
So, while killing people seems like a very cheep alternative, it is quite costly in the short run(3 years) and has nearly zero net effect in the long run. If, the new people aren't doing the exact same thing that the previous people were doin gthen it would cost the other 70% even more, because the long run would not have a near zero net effect, but it would have a negative net effect.
No matter how one wants to look at it; in a voluntaryist system, if bad policies are supported, they won't be supported for very long -not once its time to pay the bill for such policies.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: