Consent should not the default. the onus is then on individuals in the population (who could be more productively using their time) to refute these things later.
That is precisely the problem with top-down legislation in civil law versus bottom-up in common law. Neither is perfect by itself, both have issues. "Silence is acquiescence" regardles
You’ve consented to $800 in corporate welfare each year. To get that money back you’ll go to court to repeal each one of them?
https://bch.gg/7y
Will you also sit in court for these other victimless crimes, each one imposing a cost on society?
Do you think sitting in court is the only way to withdraw consent?
I started this by asking you if you meant voting was a way of withdrawing consent. all you've mentioned is court
What is the cost benefit analysis of “silence is acquiescence?” You feel it’s beneficial to sit in court for a day every time you get a ticket. Ok fine.
what is the issue with "bottom-up common law?"
you can see more things like lynchings and killings of outsiders being treated as "just", because the jury of peers in a small community may side with the insider in spite of facts
