If I'm reading you right, that's kind of a weird argument. Paraphrasing - removing fees for mandatory government services would cost too much for this one thing, and here is a better specific use for the money instead. Rather there is a whole spectrum of better and worse uses for public money, and we generally debate each on its own merits.
But either way it doesn't really address the core of what I said, in that the system currently mandated by the government has strongly benefited the surveillance industry. For example SSNs were never supposed to be used for anything besides Social Security, but a law prohibiting such abuse was never passed.
But either way it doesn't really address the core of what I said, in that the system currently mandated by the government has strongly benefited the surveillance industry. For example SSNs were never supposed to be used for anything besides Social Security, but a law prohibiting such abuse was never passed.