Thomas Elias contends that by eliminating tax increases to shore up the sovereign debt bleeding this state and nation to death, the Republicans are forcing the citizenry to rely exclusively on himself, from fetching needed resources to protecting oneself.
Granted, public resources should be channeled by public interest, yet even then a private entity can more efficiently and equitably supply scarce yet necessary resources like water and electricity. Regarding the latter, we could do with more competition rather than the subsidized private monopoly that limits a consumer's choice the moment he moves into a new home.
Moreover, Elias excessively assumes that Republicans do not want government involved at all in our lives. Protecting borders, mandating respect for the Constitution, and demonstrating fiscal responsibility, are all tenable expectation relying on the role of government. And it is frustrating that in making his argument, Elias fails to point out private or public-private partnerships whose cost is greater than the government's outlays.
Coincidentally, George Will's coinciding editorial precisely answers the seeming criticism of Mr. Elias as to the proper function of the government versus the acceptable and expected responsibilities of the citizen:
"Society is a marvel of spontaneous order among individuals in voluntary cooperation. Government facilitates this cooperation with roads, schools, police, etc. – and by getting out of its way."
In short, government, if involved in any way, must enable young and old to be able to do "most things for themselves." Beyond that, government usurps responsibility for what it can never accomplish, all at great cost in time and resources to the citizen, further frustrating his or her life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.