Hear! Hear!
Let's eat some federal level alphabet soup to make much of it go away.

Obviously I generally agree, but I am concerned about those who wish to benefit from others work/payment. Recently here in Wisconsin we pass a right to work law that says that employees of a company cannot be required to pay union dues. Though I agree with this in principal, from a practical point of view this obviously means that some group of employees will benefit from the work the union is doing while not participating (through union dues) in that work. An example that comes to mind for governments is roads. We can make them toll roads, which I would prefer to avoid or some citizens can choose to pay for the roads, but wont some citizen choose not to pay and use the roads anyway? I think this requires ethical citizens.

When I first saw this I loved the concept. Then you start to think through some of what it means.

You pay for the services of firemen and you neighbor does not. His house catches on fire and the fire services come out and hose your house down to keep it from catching on fire, and let his burn. If a society is not willing to do this, then the system of voluntary payment for services would not work.

This is but one example but there are many that could be used. While I like the concept in practice it does not work so well unless society is willing to allow the full ramification of choices land in the face of those who make poor ones.

I am not sure I could sit by and watch my neighbors house burn in the example above, and I am not certain I would want to live in a society that could do so. Lots of pro's and con's to it.

If it can be done (IE charge for the service like a company would). It should not be a government service as it can follow the model of private business and should be privately held and done for profit. .

As