A major point of disagreement among citizens in the USA is the degree to which government should be involved in people’s lives. Should government try to control the economy? Some want free markets. Others want government regulations, but in the absence of a direct democracy, the most powerful people end up making the regulations. Some want to abolish taxation as theft. Other say that without taxation there will be ever increasing economic disparity. Some want to redistribute the wealth of the rich to the poor, but others say this can lead to the creation of a political elite who get to decide where the money goes.
Should the sate provide those things that an individual needs but cannot provide on his/her own? If so, how would a Direct Democracy provide: Military Defense, Judicial system, Mass Transportation / Public Roadways, Utilities, Hospital and Emergency Care, Public Parks, Scientific Research and Development, Access to Culture and Information, and Welfare for children and disabled persons.
Should the state provide things an individual needs that he/she could provide on his/her own or purchase through a business? If so, how would a Direct Democracy help provide: Retirement plan, Education, Ordinary health care, Unemployment plan.
Could charities and consumer-owned and -run cooperatives better provide some of the services now provided by the state? such as, Welfare, Health care, Insurance, Utilities and Education. In what way does the state hamper or enable charities and cooperatives?
Should the state provide funding for programs that some individuals may object to on moral, ethical or other grounds? If so, how would a Direct Democracy provide: Offensive Warfare, Abortion services, Welfare, Various tax subsidies of private industry.