Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (285700)	8/10/2002 11:39:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I don't think this is quite true. Polls have consistently shown a majority want more and better government services, even though they also want lower taxes. And a lot of government expenditure is pretty meat and potatoes: police, fire, roads, Coast Guard, immigration, military and navy, education (which is widely accepted as a municipal responsibility), and so forth. These things cost more than they did in the 18th century. Even things like Social Security and Medicare enjoy widespread support, not a mere fraction, because of the fear of indigence in old age, and the potential impact of caring for sick relatives in their dotage on the budgets and households of those raising families. Beyond that, there is a social insurance function of many programs, and many people are willing to participate, either because they could suffer themselves, or because they see it as the function of government to pick up the slack, both as a matter of social solidarity and as a matter of social stability. No one wants children starving in the streets, just because their parents are knuckleheads, and many are leery of relying solely on private charity. Even Ronald Reagan endorsed the Safety Net, with the proviso that the able- bodied be pushed in the direction of work.......