I've recently been told that it is the governments' job "to take care of us". Apparently this is the prevailing, if simplified version, of what those in Washington believe these days. I have also been astounded by the reporters and proponents of various legislation who seem to think those protesting current bills somehow don't understand what they'll get as a result of those policies.
There is a definite division between two world views. Although many things contribute to this division, there is a fundamental basis for it that has no compromise. One believes we should maintain our limited government and promote personal responsibility; the other believes that it is the government's job to ensure that everyone have a job, a house, health care and anything else one might need. One is a recipe for many variations and levels of income, comfort, health and safety with personal freedoms and responsibility as a requirement and the other is a recipe for a safe and secure nanny state with few personal freedoms or responsibility. The second is looking good to many people these days, but don't expect everyone to buy it just because there are some perks thrown in.
People around the world, who currently live in what I consider heavy-handed governments, genuinely don't see what we're all worked up about. That isn't because they live in such a state of utopia, but because humankind is an adaptable species. We like what we know. If we don't know freedom (and the accompanying responsibility), then we won't know to miss it . . . until we descend into the pit of unrestrained government and its accompanying abuses. Once we start on that path there is no real power of the people to restrain a government who is "responsible" for everyone's welfare. It's becomes a parent-child relationship and the governmental parent will pick and choose which complaint to hear and disregard the rest . . . then find a minimally acceptable (or not) solution which will be the final decision.
The nature of government is to grow itself, in money and power. A government is not capable of charity. A government is not capable of love or empathy. A government is not capable of limiting its own power. But now, we are supposed to disregard the basic nature of government and trust that this time it will be different . . . better. A person, an individual, is capable of charity, of love, of empathy. Each individual can be restrained to some degree by their own personal morals and the relationships with those around them. Individuals who refuse to restrain themselves and lack empathy or love reek havoc on society (murders, rapists, thieves) . . . how much more dangerous then is a government?
In our continuing quest for safety and security, let's not be lulled into the false promise of governmental "care". Care can only come from individuals who take personal responsibility for themselves and show charity to those in need. This is a hard sell to those seeking only the easiest way, but BEWARE . . . in the search for ease it is assured by both human nature and the nature of government that we will lose the most precious of gifts: Freedom.