Again, I called it last summer (Man, I'm on a roll here)
As many others predicted and as has been shown to us in recent months the Obama cabinet runs more like a smug psedo-socialist political scheme than a presidency. Some of us have grown tired with their apprent idea that simply waying "We won" with a smile on your face is an itellient response to politicians of other parties, former presidents included, who criticise their actions, as if winning the presidencey were some kind of blanket validation of their practices. But I digress.
My real point is that I can't agree with the logic for the massive spendind and wealth redistribution we've bene seeing and hearing about.
This is said logic:
It is the government's job to protect the livelihood of it's citizens*. In a sense, the government has a duty to provide for the needs of it's citizens, and they have a right to be provided for. Therefore, wealth redistribution for the sake of advancing the goal of protecting livelihood is justified, because it must be done for the government to accomplish what's basically a right. While there is truth to this, this innocent statement usually dovetails into some sort of validation for state controlled healthcare or laws made to protect citizens' health. This, I think, is because the statement that they leave out where I've put the asterisk is "Whether they want it or not"
The whole thing is better summed up here.