Sounds like a good idea to me. Sort of a step beyond the parliamentary systems, though of course there would be details to work out.

Yes. That’s just what’s so great about Americans: We could take Socialism and make it our way. (Others have!)

Do you mean proportional representation?

@flutherother Close, But everyone gets a say. You can change your vote anytime and all votes count. If you want you can choose to govern yourself with one vote , ( yours), and have a say. Every decision is put to a referendum and you can choose to give your vote away to a proxy or run your own affairs. Also budgets and decisions only affect those who vote for it. Like for example each voter decides what tax money that they contributed goes to. You can support multiple budgets in a system. Like having every slice of pizza your own choice of toppings. I think technology has progressed enough to handle this system of bureaucracy.

It would probably require a lot of computer work to support voter taxes & program funding based on what each voter has voted for!

Can I opt out of speed limits I think are too low?

@Zaku Yes but only in your property, unless the law permits. There would be some common laws that most people would agree too. Germany has the autobahn with no speed limits so it would be possible to change the laws.

Seems to me like such a system, if I’m understanding you correctly, would quickly lead to a severely disorganized and dysfunctional society.

@Darth_Algar Anymore than it already is? We would work the kinks out. In a sense All humans have this level of freedom granted by life. I would like to see if it works.

One might not like certain things in society, but ours is hardly unorganized or dysfunctional.

To give one example: let’s say too many people opt out of paying taxes for necessary infrastructure maintenance. As a result our roads degrade to the point where they’re no longer usable. What then?

@RedDeerGuy1 Well I think I’m all for that. There are already no speed limits on private roads or tracks, but I have long thought that there should be some communities where speed limits are higher. Currently in the USA I think the situation is that both state and federal governments impose consequences (such as no federal highway funding) if some smaller jurisdiction wanted to have a 120 MPH speed limit (or no limit) somewhere.

It seems to me there is a natural trade-off between variety and communication of what the rules are, as well as some compatibility issues, but overall I would like to see more variety in the laws in the USA rather than more forcing everyplace to have the same laws. This has been a core issue since before the Constitution was agreed upon (local rights vs state rights vs federal authority).

@Darth_Algar We already have this issue. Driving from one county to another, the roads sometimes do change in condition for pretty much this very reason.

Of course some extreme examples would lead to some extreme, inconvenient, and perhaps very problematic outcomes in some cases.

It seems to me the question is how small should the regional differences be, and how much should the larger groups be able to dictate or override the authority of the smaller groups. We already have a municipal, county, state and federal hierarchy, but the larger layers tend to impose a lot of conformity on the lower/smaller layers.