Is it the responsibility of government to protect people from themselves?

No, I certainly agree that these policies would have to be removed slowly. That is just common sense. Immediately removing programs leads to harmful side effects. However, the policies you advocate still require state intervention, a sizeable FDA, and nowhere near the limited government a libertarian desires.

 

I find it ironic that everything you listed effects other people not just the individual.

 

They do indeed affect others. The question will always be, should we encourage education and personal responsibility or the government regulating every possible area of our lives.

 

Education and personal responsabilty is always important things to promote. But the human animal tends towards selfishness and there are many people that are more then happy to harm their fellow man if it makes things easier on them. So no it is not the responsability of governement to protect people from themselves, but when their actions effect those around them then it is in the governments perview too get involved if those action cuase harm.

 

You dont seem to want to connect the dots. The fact it cannot be removed quickly means that the policies must remain. This isnt "advocacy" of stat intervention - its a pragmatic realization of the necessity for it to remain in some part as society seeks better outcomes outside government control.

 

You can only scale back a program so far before you remove it completely. But, as Milton Friedman said, "there is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program"

 

Yes....

I believe Friedman is wrong. In fact I believe he invalidates his own claim when he talks about the privatization of government industries and programs. Clearly the government will opt for the best solution where its people encourage it to do so.

 

Actually its the role of government to make sure everyones needs are met to free them up to meet some wants and not have to worry.

 

That is not consistent with reality. There is so much corruption in government it will make your head spin. In my business I watch the FCC design rules that screw certain companies and its customers to favor others, or simply not allowing another competitor in the market. I see congressman and senators use inside information they learn through congress to grow themselves fortunes. I see politicians reward campaign contributors with grants and low interest loans. I almost find it rare that the government honestly acts in the best interest of the public.

 

Then your government needs reform. In some cases government can go now, in others, like food discussed above, it needs to stay.

I find it is a mixed bag, although Australia is fairly different to America by way of government initiative, I would argue.

 

I am not too familiar with Australian government, but I think you can agree that there are many differences between our cultures. I hope you would also recognize that extrapolation never quite works out how you think it is going to. A government that serves 23 million people is much more manageable than a government that serves 312 million people.

 

Certainly. Let me give an example of a government policy I would like to see removed here - superfunds; which involves people putting part of their wage aside for their retirement to ensure people do not put stress on the system of government pensions. A recent study has confirmed the obvious that 1. Since people cant control their own wealth, the companies that acquire it are often to risky and 2. People still continue to spend exorbitantly debt wise such that their super will only just cover their expenses and they will end up on a pension anyway.

I dont necessarily agree with that particular conclusion, but I agree with your point entirely - context and conditions of particular policies changes their feasibility and thus how one should respond to it.

 

The answer to your question is no. But some of the examples you give are examples of the government protecting people from other people.

 

I do understand the argument that some laws may over step some of our rights or freedoms. We all know that laws are made to keep society safe from others and themselves. We decide as a society to make laws and to get the question on hand "yes it is the governments responsibility." If you believe that the laws are unfair then speak up.