The primary role of any government, as postulated by Hobbes, and later expanded upon by Locke, is to provide security for the citizenry of its sovereign nation. Security comes in a variety of forms. We know it as national defense, as well as, rules of mercantile. Each of which is designed to protect the individuals right to fair play.
The economy of a sovereign nation is a complex living thing. Adam Smith recognized that with each duty or responsibility of a nation there is an expense for which revenue must be garnished. Our founding fathers recognized this as well. Using the philosophies and teachings of Hobbes, Locke, Smith, and Machiavelli, they contrived an ideal government. A government with limited power which required limited resources. By restricting the powers of government to those necessary only to the needs of the nation with respect to the engagement of our nation with other sovereign entities, including states, they also restricted the required resources needed to run our government. By doing so, they reduced the burden of acquiring revenue through taxation upon our citizens. This in turn provided for greater freedom and opportunity for each individual by allowing citizens to accumulate wealth without damages creating incentives for economic freedom.
Adam Smith also observed, in the work of Machiavelli, that individuals who have a personal stake in their economic success tend to acquire the abilities and skills necessary to insure such a success. He noted that the fall of Lorenzo of Medicis was primarily caused by the use of agents in his mercantile projects for an agent usually will regard the wealth of their master as inexhaustible and are careless with how they spend it. From this, we can also contrive, that most governments which provide a means for its people through the use of agents may squander the wealth of the nation because such agents will view the revenue resources of its labor as limitless with out regard to the effects of such expense upon the individual laborer. We see this effect today in welfare societies where government has expanded into numerous agencies with each providing a service for the populus and each requiring a revenue source for the expense of such service. In such nations, wealth has been squandered and the labor of the private citizen goes to pay the debt of the nation rather than to benefit the necessities and conveniences of the individual.
As our nation has grown in wealth, so too has our government grown in appetite for revenue. Why? Service to our country seems to no longer take the appearance of servitude but rather the ambience of nobility. We look upon our Representatives, not as men or women who are in our service, but as feudal Lords from which we seek some comfort by means of business, shelter, healthcare, or food for which we have become willing, over time, to give up our rights to freedom. Freedom from the burden of debt and taxation. Friedman called it the "rational consumer" for which he said that an individual will always spend a significant proportion of his perceived wealth. Smith also noted that a government, in the same manner as its citizens, would be compelled to the same behavior, to spend said proportion. But what happens when a new need arises? For the citizen laborer, he must improve upon his skill or judgement to find new means to generate revenue for such a need. A government; however, requires only to impose new taxation. For remember, an agent views his master's wealth as limitless. This is the effect of politics on our economy. Policiticians, enamored in their own aristrocracies, cling to power by offering benefits to their constituents. Benefits that are payed for by other laborers. And as these treatise of benefits have grown overtime, so too has the requirment for revenue. Compounded upon debt, such an expense drags upon the citizens ability to achieve their own economic freedom. A state required by the feudal lords for it lends their subjects to welfare.
For a nation to be vibrant and healthy, its citizens must be prosperous. Not its government, but rather its individuals which government should serve. In order for services and products to be fair priced, competition for sales must be achieved through a free market. Take for example the nature of our current healthcare system. During the administration of Franklin Roosevelt, it became mandatory that certain businesses, who employed a number of laborers, were required to provide health insurance to their workforce. At first glance, this would appear a humane act; however, because businesses are now required, by law, to provide health insurance for their laborers, competition for individual health insurance is no longer necessary which provides no balance for pricing individual policies. Balance would be present if insurance providers, by nature of a free market, were required to compete for each individual policy without the security of bulk prospects, ordained by law, to make such purchases. It is in this way that government has created a new need, national insurance, which will require new revenue and reduce the opportunities of wealth for the individual. Common sense would suggest that we revoke the current order of things and return healthcare to the free market. Instead, we are bombarded with political speeches necessitating the need for nationalization and more revenue.