<Apparently a lot of people object to attempts to eliminate social security, public schooling, environmental protections and other social programs.

Were any such attempts actually taking place, as opposed to existing only in the fevered brains of liberals, you might almost have a point. Feel free to check out the actual 2003 budget and point out any real cuts in any of these programs.

Almost have a point. Of course, your basic assumption is that these government programs are the only solutions to the problems they are supposed to solve. I submit that this does not match the facts.

Social Security: will detonate in a few decades and collapse like any other Ponzi scheme. Has a pathetic rate of return compared to almost any alternative. Is based on government IOUs, as opposed to real growth of wealth in private sector investments.

It's one sterling quality: allows politicians to take the most reliable voting group in America and basically enslave them to the Federal government. Naturally, this last is the true purpose of the program, which is why privatizing it is being fought so hard. Social Security is a complete farce, and the sooner we citizens are given the freedom to bail out of it, the better.

Public Schooling: spends more every year and generates ever more poorly-educated kids. Half a trillion dollars has been flushed through the Department of Education since it was founded in 1980 with few real results. Compares badly when stacked up against private schools, home schooling, and other alternatives. It's one sterling quality: allows the government a near-monopoly pipeline into the formation of our young people's mindsets.

Environmental Protections: long ago stopped being an effort to clean up the environment, and has become a home for the worst element of radical leftism. It's main purpose now is the destruction of private enterprise, corporations, and technology in general. Its one consistent goal: every action proposed by the environmental movement acts to increase the power of the central government and decrease the power of the individual citizen.

Other Social Programs: Have not decreased the level of poverty and has instead created an entire class of voters totally dependent on the government for a living. Refer back to the "true purpose of Social Security."

An observant person might note the one thing most major government programs have in common: They increase the power of government. Anything else they might or might not accomplish is completely irrelevant as long as the illusion can be maintained that the programs are not only useful, but absolutely essential. Have you ever noticed that the people telling you we would all die horrible deaths without government programs are the people running these programs? Doesn't this conflict of interest ever bother anyone?