Wow! Jan Helfeld’s interview with Harry Reid sure touched off a firestorm of comments. The interview and its reactions illustrate the twin dangers of radicalism and rationalization.

Taxation for the most part is theft. (Exceptions are certain user fees and externality taxes.) However, doing without taxation is truly problematic. Without taxes, we might not be able to fund an adequate military, a broad social safety net, astronomical baseball player salaries, or a helium fund for our mighty dirigible fleet.

Machiavelli provided the answer: if evil is required to accomplish a greater good, then go for it. But be honest. There is no social contract. We tax because the ends justify the means.

Or do they? For national defense I would say the answer is a strong “yes.” Without theft by our own government, we might suffer worse theft by a conqueror. Some social safety net programs might be justifiable as well. Given the choice between robbing the rich to pay for institutions and group homes or letting the severely mentally handicapped go without care, I’ll take robbing the rich. (But if I can dodge this choice through charity, then methinks charity is the better answer.)

On the other hand, I am not persuaded that the benefits of a city owned baseball stadium justify theft. Professional baseball is entertainment for people who like boring sports. Let them fund their boring pastime through ticket sales or donations. (Or better yet, let them watch chess tournaments. The players are cheaper and the action is far more intense.)

Your values may differ. If you think getting a Major League franchise in your city is so important that it justifies robbing your neighbors – including those of us who hate baseball – then go for it. Just realize that you are committing robbery to support your pastime and take moral responsibility.

And don’t be surprised when someone robs you back to pay for that mighty dirigible fleet.