@realcaseyrollins @sev let's think about that for a min. In our current situation, that means 325 million people funding the defense of this entire giant section of a continent (and not very well, illegal immigrants get in all the time) and I don't see any good reason why New York for example should fund or have a say in the defense of Texas. Take that to it's logical conclusion, I don't see why I should pay for or have a say in your defense or vice versa.

Take the current upcoming conflict (assuming they're not both in on it) between the US and China. *I* don't have any ill will or poor reputation with any particular Chinaman and would have no reason to worry about missile defense or any of that nonsense if it weren't for the US government's forays on my behalf into (potential) conflict with China.

So this comes to two points really: 1) even in defense, it's tough to prove any public good theory necessitating the use of taxation for funding and B) many of the reasons that defense Might be a public good are caused by the same organization that supposedly provides the service. It seems to me that such an organization that seeks your approval and funding would have every incentive to make up a reason (war) for you to fund them. Classic snake oil really.