right, but centrally planned economies don't naturally occur in the same way that free exchange does. It is contrary to reason that if I make something and my neighbor makes something and we decide to trade that a third party must be involved by law who will take a percentage of the value of the exchange. You can make the argument that by providing the legal framework that makes non-violent exchange possible (police, contract law) as well as the infrastructure that facilitated our exchange (roads) that the third party deserves a small piece.

This would be a devastating argument. If I had a choice in the matter. In a free market system of courts and transportation I would pay a fee for use. This is fair. But to tithe a percentage of my productivity regardless of how much or little I make use of said system seems fraudulent.