" The primary function of the government, any government, is to take care of it's people. That's the buy in. If a government isn't doing that..then it is a government that is a failure. " Another poster wrote that in another thread. Just wondering how many of you believe that. I can see adding an addendum that says " for those cannot physically or mentally care for themselves ". However, is even that really the primary function of gov't? Or a secondary one? For the first 150 years or so of our country, that function was totally out of the gov'ts pervue. Family, friends, neighbors, churches, and other organizations such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army took care of those in need. Why did that change, other than perhaps for political reasons to buy votes? No worries, the gov't will provide. No responsibilities either, somebody else will pay for it. Do we really want this kind of society? Surely we've seen the problems in Europe, where social democracies are being crushed by the financial burden of that primary function. They've raised individual taxes higher than ours, yet still do not have enough revenue to pay for all of the social programs. And now most are cutting back or have already done so. Question: many on the left demand fairness. Well what's fair about passing a 15 trillion dollar debt and growing, to future generations? That's what the primary function of taking care of our people has lead us to. I find no morality or honor or integrity about that. This isn't about rich people living like pigs; this is about everybody living like pigs, many on the gov'ts (and our's) dime. That's what happens when you let the gov't take care of you.