It matters to me little than politicians believe that they are acting in the 'common good' because they can't legitimately define any such concept. You can't simply say that the majority is more important than the minority, because if you define people as perpetrators and victims by such political paradigms, then you defile man's dignity, and replace it with cheap shots for power or material indulgence, neither of which is earned, whether though physical or mental effort, but thrust upon in the name of some arbitrary premise.
The practical consequence of the welfare state, or the system of government underpinned by a government's capacity to profit by stealing another's labour, is that people are reduced to parasites and perpetrators. It is not a basis for respect. People don't think so much like that during prosperous expansions, but it grows during times of contraction. You begin to see a culture of entitlement. The politicians generated this by arguing that each man is better than his standing, that he is intrinsically of value. The droll task of defining what value, in which function is not considered, the intent is of course to gain allegiences, regardless of whether the intent is to pass favour or not, its surely not his profit he is sacrificing. The question is - should the politician not be considered a 'grand thief' for causing the expropriation of each taxpayer.
The greatest issue is that:
1. The law is not open to challenge by anyone
2. The law (in the USA) need not even reconcile with the constitution
3. The happiness and interests of taxpayers are of no consequence
I would happily like to see politicians in prison - minimum 5 year term.
Andrew Sheldon www.sheldonthinks.com