If you claim the a monopoly government is necessary to prevent the predation of the disadvantaged by the powerful, then I ask, howz that workin out for you so far?
Here's a question: let's say you could, for the rest of your life, commit 30% of your income and savings to charitable organizations of your choice, with a certain amount required to go to basic needs charities, in exchange for never paying taxes on anything ever again. Would you say yes? If that's too much, what's the maximum you'd go up to?
My maximum is zero percent. It's my money. If I am forced to be charitable, it's not really charity, is it? How much freedom would you be willing to give up for freedom? Your question makes no sense.
I fear you are mistaking money for freedom.
your freedom is always measured by the freedom of the people living around you.
Yes... probably that is part of the problem in conflating concepts of economic freedom with other kinds of freedoms that may exist as a citizen... Yet, sorry to say, as members of a society, we also have responsibilities... that may rub against and compete with the extent, quantity and kind of freedoms that we are able to experience as members of society.
Monetary freedom, financial freedom is the issue at hand. If you think otherwise, then it is you who are mistaken.