Liberals and libertarians agree that the state ought to prioritize the protection of civil liberties such as freedom of association, freedom of religious practice, freedom of speech, and so on. But they disagree about the status of property. Rawls, for instance, recognizes that citizens do need some right to own property “to allow a sufficient material basis for a sense of personal independence and self-respect” (
One big difference is that the use of property by one person may non-contractually limit the liberty of use of property by another. The emitter of CO2 did not purchase the right to harm those that are harmed. Taxing an externality sort of get around this by limiting the amount of harm but by itself does not completer the "transaction" by paying out the proceeds to victim.
Speech/worship does not have the same "externality"
One big difference is that the use of property by one person may non-contractually limit the liberty of use of property by another. The emitter of CO2 did not purchase the right to harm those that are harmed. Taxing an externality sort of get around this by limiting the amount of harm but by itself does not completer the "transaction" by paying out the proceeds to victim.
Speech/worship does not have the same "externality"