>>>One thing we can learn from all this so far is, don't trust the gov't to protect you or help you except in a very BASIC way. They can't do everything for you and we're fools to expect perfection.
>
>>That's the philosophy of little-to-no-government:
>
>I think that was the original idea. Small non-intrusive government. Gov't has gotten way too big.
>
>>they'll take the country to war,
>
>Yeah. Sometimes they do.
>
>>they'll bail out the fallen large businesses,
>
>You mean like Crysler? On this one, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't. People whose jobs are at stake want it and, well others.... who knows.
>
>>they'll provide tax cuts for the rich,
>
>Oh that arguement again.
>
>>but when it comes to helping the citizens, it's everyone to his own.
>
>For the most part yes. What do you wnat the gov't to do for you? Or should I ask what CAN they really do for you?

Sam,
Democratic governments are elcted, in theory, to serve THE PEOPLE.
"The people" includes all of us, from the richest to the poorest. Note, however, that "the people" excludes corporations/business.

What you seem to suggest is that "dog eat dog" should be the norm, possibly relying on corporations and business.

Some, like me, see basically the reverse. Corporations/business can take care of themselves and let's have government take care of THE PEOPLE.
You don't really think that you went to war in Iraq for "the people", do you?
In case you do, let me clarify for you that it was done for oil, big business and future flexing (for more oil and more big business).