In particular, what is "Government"? Any organizationâ"any organization at allâ"that confiscates resources by threat of strike-first violence is a "governmental" organization. When one such organization becomes a monopoly, we call that organization "Government".
No, an organization that confiscates resources by threat of violence could be any organization whatsoever. Do you consider the drug cartels in Mexico to be the "government?" Absolutely not. They have their own democratically elected government, for better or worse.
"The government" is the body that makes the laws. Yes in some cases that happens to also be the violent warlords, cartels, etc but that's by no means a necessity. And yes, a government of any type requires a means to enforce said laws. There's a huge difference between using the threat of violence for legal enforcement vs using the threat of violence for confiscation. (Or using the threat of violence to stifle dissent or any other purpose.)
Government inevitably becomes just another bad company in the market place
I imagine most governments are terrible companies in the market place because that's not their realm of operation. They exist to oversee the public good (definition of "public" being the general distinction between types of government -- from monarchs who think they are the public to fully democratic systems where the public tries to protect itself to fully social system where big brother tries to protect his "siblings." All in theory of course!)
one that doesn't go out of business because it is able to confiscate your resources by threat of violence
You have to go a LONG way down the tax evasion line before actual violence is threatened. At some base level yes, the police will enforce the laws, but from a higher level perspective tax isn't a "confiscation" its a shared pool of resources that is (supposed to be) used for the purpose of keeping all other shared resources healthy for the public to use.
it doesn't give you the goods and services for which you personally think you are paying, but you have to pay them anyway
I suppose you never drive on a road, are perfectly happy if your house burns down and nobody comes to rescue you, don't care if children get educated, don't care if your country gets invaded and you can't defend yourself, don't care if your air gets polluted as per my previous theoretical situation, etc. Its absolutely true that the US government in particular has been using tax money to further the ends of individuals and corporations who hold too much sway over Washington for the past few decades but that's mainly because the US government is too close to the free market, not because its too far away. The free market equates money with power and that's not an system any government should run under if they are intending to provide services for the entire public rather than just the rich.
it's totally absurd and unconscionable.
Why do you think that? Because you don't like paying taxes? Most people don't like paying taxes but luckily the majority of us understand that our governing bodies don't operate in a magic land where everything is free only for them. They have to obtain operational money from somewhere.
It is not a modern value to coerce resources from people by threat of violence. So, in fact, Government is actually the last barbaric vestige of a pre-modern civilization.
The only reason its not a modern value is because we've invented governmental systems that allow deterrents to arbitrary violence. I'm not entirely sure what your alternative is. A purely free market cannot exist (at least in the real world) as I've previously stated even on its own merits, never mind taking into consideration in the guy who happens to be able to afford the biggest club and decides he's not a fan of anyone besides him being free, markets included -- and a guy like with always come around sooner or later unless someone manages to genetically engineer the asshole gene out of our species.