If you could choose one of these two as the sole responsibility of our nations government, which would it be..

Question

... and why?

Please exercise a little bit of discipline and choose one from this list.

a. Take care of it’s populace through socialist welfare programs

b. Provide security and protection from enemies both foreign and domestic

Disclose your ideological persuasion if you will.

Answer 1

B. That is the role of government per the Constitution. I can take care of myself when it comes to the rest. I can also lend a hand to my neighbor in need much quicker ans efficiently than the government ever could.

Answer 2

I would have to choose the latter: "Provide secuirty and protection from enemies both foreign and domestic."
I believe in state's rights and responsibilities. I believe in less government (overall), thus keeping the power localized and allowing the voices of each state to be heard at a much more meaningful level.
While we must maintain a uniformity of commerce -- begining with a standardized currency (read: federal level), it should not be up to each state to have to deal with foreign relations and overall protection of this country. The federal government then, should focus its concern on international commerce and national interests (threat to commerce, real estate or citizens abroad).
When Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence, he spoke of freedom. That "Freedom," was of financial independence. Paying a homage (tax) to an entity unseen leaves most feeling unrepresented. Those with the most money have the greatest number of choices. Those who have little to no money, are enslaved to their creditors.
Ours is a capitalist economy. With wealth comes privilege. (leading into why I would not choose Socialst Welfare) When the federal government legislates to the degree that all is distributed "Fairly" across the board, it infacts robs those who've acheived of their reward. Why strive to get ahead if, in the end, the government is only going to strip you of your acheivements and give your earnings to those who did not put forth the effort or plan as well as you? Such a system only promotes complacency and laziness. You would not put forth your best effort in study or in work becuase you would already know that their would be no personal reward. And let's face it, personal ownership offers great reward. What would then be deemed "fair" by those who did little or nothing, is completely unfair to those who put forth the effort. In the end, what you have is a society completely dependent upon their government for everything. They will forget how to fight, how to do for themselves and will always expect more. Should that government fail, the people would be abandoned and ultimately parish (see the Mayor of New Orleans and his lack of execution of an evacuation of his city. -- Those left behind were all completely dependent upon HIS government. His buses were left as were his people. Chaos ensued.).

Answer 3

I applaud this rare example of a truly thought provoking question.

I will have to support A. While there is a fear incited by the thought of not being protected by the government from enemies, I believe that domestic enemies can be contained, for the most part, by basic needs taken care of.

Additionally, by focusing on domestic issues, a nation will have less foreign offenses resulting in the need for foreign security.

In the event that a country, like German or Japan in WWII attempts a world take over, security becomes a priority, and a country sacrifices what can be let go, and holds on to what must be protected. And security-less socialist nations risk individuals grabbing power and trying to control and ration. Again, in this case a populous can choose to find ways to defend.

Have something worth fighting for before picking fights.

Answer 4

B. I can work, earn money, buy whatever I want and need, including medicine and health insurance and I can protect myself and my family from burglars (with the exception of the Electric and Phone monopolies). I cannot fight off an invasion from Mars, nor an invasion from Homeland Security so in that case... I would expect the government to protect me from these.

Answer 5

You give two choices that are de facto self declarers of one's ideology/philosophy .Ergo,what is the point of the question???

You sound like a partisan extremist like Bush who sees everything in a dysfunctional black and white paradigm.

In fact your two choices are in fact not choices at all for they are effectively mutually exclusive .Choosing between two mutually exclusive positings is simply silly.

It's "apples and oranges" .

Answer 6

obviously b

If your answer is a, you have no concept of what the constitution is or what the Founding Fathers' intent was


What part of limitied government do people NOT understand?

Answer 7

b.

If you don't take out your enemies than you won't have the chance for anything you want to do in your own country

Answer 8

b. We wouldn't have a populace if it weren't for b.

Answer 9

b.

I can, with effort, take care of myself.

I cannot, however, secure this nation by myself.

Answer 10

a.

you need to clean up your own house first in order to be able to go around and clean up others'