[s1artibartfast]

The common thread in your examples is the idea of entitlements.

Either entitlement to the doctors/engineers labor or a house one doesnt own.

I dont think externalities is the most useful model for thinking about this because it is easy to construct a more favorable hypothetical. That doesnt mean one is entiteled to it.

[slowin]

You are entitled to a benefit from your tax dollars being spent. Otherwise, it's just theft.

[s1artibartfast]

No, no you arent. Money given without strings attached is just that. Claiming ownership of another humans labor is called slavery.

It might be evidence that you or your government isn't benefiting you with its spending. That doesnt put obligation on the recipient.

[slowin]

My taxes aren't "money given without strings attached". They are payment for services that benefit myself and others in the community. They're not a free gift for the government to hand out, that's theft.

[s1artibartfast]

Sure, I agree with that. I just think that is a problem to take up with your government. It doesnt mean a doctor or engineer owes you.

[wat10000]

Does the same reasoning apply to student loans? Is the lender engaging in slavery by claiming entitlement to a portion of the student’s future labor?

[s1artibartfast]

No, student loans are not slavery for two reasons. First, the borrower agreed and signed a contract. Second, the debt owner is the one calling it due.

This is substantially different than expecting control on how debt free doctors or engineers spend their time or what jobs they work.

The crux of this is that externalty price analysis is only useful when bounded by real harms and property rights. Otherwise, anyone can call anything they dont like an externality: If my employee quits for a better job- Externality! If a woman wants to go home to their family instead of having sex with me - Externality!

[wat10000]

The doctors would also have agreed and signed a contract. And the debt owner i.e. the state is calling it due.

[s1artibartfast]

Are you claiming that is a fact about the world today or suggesting it as your future hypothetical?

Seems fine if the government or another group was willing to lend or pay for education in exchange for future services.

I think it would be bad policy if the government made this the only way or a licensing requirement.

There are also some moral hazards if the exit Clauses aren't reasonable.