I don't mind someone acting in their own best interest. I'm upset that other people assume they possess the right to run the world in the way they seem fit, imposing their subjectivity on the masses. Is not the only necessary purpose of government to maintain peace? Thanks, government, for law enforcement. I think Thomas Hobbes has it right.
However, there is a incredibly fundamental fine line that is crossed with every new irrelevant law that is passed to orchestrate the opinions of the few, to govern the masses. Law enforcement consistently crosses a fine line between liberty and safety. It's a zero sum game. Our law system should be in place for strictly mutual purposes, to prevent one from harming another. To maintain the social contract. Any laws created for an alternate purpose are idealistic, and fundamentally infringe upon our liberty. Why do we exchange freedom for an attempt to prevent others from harming themselves? Why is government doing anything other than maintaining the social contract?
The moment the system that we created dipped its hands into any form of distributing wealth, it crossed a line. If I want to support the unemployed, elderly, or sick, perhaps I will donate to a charity. No, I don't support paying a tax towards whatever our government sees fit to spend it on. I'd like to pay for roads, firefighters, postal service, and people to keep us *safe*. But, are not incentive driven businesses, governed by competition, the best way to take care of all of that? But a law implies an absolute truth. It's no place for opinions.
The founding fathers of our country had thought a lot of these things through when they wrote up the blueprint for our nation. It's our fault that we got severely off track and added everything that we did. If they came back and took a look at what we are doing today, I'm sure they would be pretty pissed too.