re: #9 Buck

It really isn’t the same thing.

This isn’t at all changing who is providing the service. In your example it is.

However, if I can use it, and say everyone gets a certain amount of firefighting ($8,000) worth per year. If they use more than that, AND they are in the top 2% of the earners in the USA, they they pay 70% of the additional costs over the initial $8,000. People in the next 6 percent of the distribution would pay 50% of costs over the initial $8,000.
Everyone else would get the same service they always did, and would get 100% of the costs over the initial amount paid for.

Would you still say the Government is providing fire fighting service?

Not exactly, but it fits better than your example.

Then why insist on going to a voucher system instead of just making people pay more for the system that already exists?