Thread: Where Do We Draw The Line?

To elaborate on what I wrote earlier - what I see as balance:

Government should be able to afford itself
This is pretty self explanatory... The only question is "how?"
In my opinion the best solution is for government to maintain relatively low tax rates, do what it can to promote economic growth - and absolutely not spend more than it takes in.

Government should ensure the liberty of the people
IOW - criminal law. This is not just protecting the physical safety, but also property rights. That includes regulations that prevent business entities from ripping off the people, while not passing laws that over-reach that point. Yeah, there are lots of laws on the books because some idiot somewhere tried to rip people off - those idiots deserve to be incarcerated (note I didn't refer to an evil corporation - most corporations, or large companies are not evil!). Laws that go beyond simple protection of health / safety / property rights are not needed.

Government should not pass laws that change supply / demand of any product or service
Price controls, floors, ceilings, and subsidies have been shown historically to cause more harm than good in the long run.

Government should not spend its time on social or religious issues
This, in my opinion, is not the realm of government. It doesn't matter which way these laws go - it amounts to one side of an issue imposing its will on the other. That is not freedom.

Government should not pass legislation based on news headlines
This is one of the biggest for me - uninformed legislators fighting to be the first to get their name in the news with a popular story that people are following. Probably more stupid laws have been passed as a result of this than anything else.
Also interesting, and ultimately what changed my view of politics - is that a party will go against it's own core values to try and promote itself in the manner they see public opinion going. Amusingly, the other party takes the opposite stance, because the nature of a (ridiculous) two-party system is that you can't be in agreement with the other guys.

Government should not pass "feel good" laws or resolutions
It is not the business of government to waste time on things like baseball or whether a family has a right to "pull the plug" on a brain-dead family member.
It is also pointless to spend time on resolutions regarding stuff school kids send in.

Government should not be a means to a lifestyle
I am all for programs that provide insurance against catastrophe and help people get back on their feet or help to those that are stuck at the bottom due to circumstances beyond their control.
I am absolutely not ok with programs that allow people to use the government as their sole means of living indefinitely, or as a subsidy for people that are not in a situation where a subsidy is necessary.
I may not be expressing myself clearly - the point is that I am in favor of programs that help people become productive members of society. I just think that the maximum level that's paid out by these programs is WAY too high. Doesn't it seem a little incongruous to be on food stamps and getting $8k a year "back" in taxes (when $0 is paid in) while living in a 1400 square foot apartment with a car lease of $400 / month and taking a week long trip to Mexico every spring?

Oh - and don't tell me what I can or can't eat, and for God's sake - keep your hands off my guns!