I doubt people would donate enough to support a modern military, but maybe we could get by with a smaller one (personally, I wouldn't count on it). Overall, it would at least take a pretty radical change in our culture, which has gotten used to receiving from the government.
I would definitely like to see people having more direct control over which projects their money goes to, though, like earmarking some of your (already mandatory in my scenario) money for street repairs near your house. Projects people care about get funded. Bridges to nowhere... less so.
What in your view is the threshold for government action? Is it only to prevent violence, or similar violations of person and property?
> What in your view is the threshold for government action? Is it only to prevent violence, or similar violations of person and property?
My views are evolving, which is why I asked the question in this forum, which I consider to be pretty sharp and left-leaning. I think government could extend beyond what you suggest. Public works projects are not out of the question. Establishment of just laws seems reasonable. Protecting the country from the tyranny of other nations seems necessary.
I think the US Constitution is a good place to start, to determine the threshold.
I actually have little doubt that we could raise enough money through donations to support a modern military. The people who have a great deal of wealth have reason to protect the system; many have a strong desire to make a difference.
I would definitely like to see people having more direct control over which projects their money goes to, though, like earmarking some of your (already mandatory in my scenario) money for street repairs near your house. Projects people care about get funded. Bridges to nowhere... less so.
What in your view is the threshold for government action? Is it only to prevent violence, or similar violations of person and property?