"The function of this government is to protect the individual rights of man, to include his property. There are only three legitimate functions of government:
1. Police to protect individuals against criminals.
2. A military to protect against foreign invaders.
3. Courts to settle disputes according to the laws of men."
Without an EPA, how would corporate pollution be controlled? Government pollution? Think Hanford, for instance.
Without an FDA, how would a safe food supply be maintained?
I'm talking here about an FDA better insulated from corporate influence.
Without A CDC, how would public health issues be monitored and hopefully the resources directed to emerging threats to public health? How would epidemics be detected, tracked, and the resources marshalled to counter them?
How would our currency be managed in a global economy? Money supply? Who would keep banks honest, especially investment banks? A conceptual oxymoron, I admit.
Who would manage our relations with other countries in this increasingly complex, multi polar world? The military?
No government role in education? I doubt enough people woud be able to afford private education to cause much investment in education by the private sector, especially with no minimum wage, outsourcing, and insourcing.
I could go on, but this should do to make my point, which is: In a modern society, certain essential areas require an oversight function and, in some cases, active government involvement if society is to remain viable.
"America revolutionized the world and created a standard of living second to none. What appears to be the decline in America is the result of its mixed economy, which is accelerating from capitalism to socialism. It is almost a runaway train, but we can stop it."
One of our most prosperous periods, especially in terms of the percentage of the population enjoying it, was in the Post WW II period, not long after the FDR Administration passed some of the most sweeping regulatory legislation in the nation's history.
"And what about the minority who truly cannot work or take care of themselves. They would have to rely on the charity of those better off. And Americans do give to others, only we prefer to do it of our own volition, not at the point of the tax collector's gun."
We currently have some 25 million people either unemployed or underemployed. Without government assistance, do you seriously believe that their more fortunate brethren would take up the slack? Back to my initial question: What would you do about these 25 million unfortunates?
No minimum wage? In combination with outsourcing of the high skill jobs and insourcing of the low skill jobs, combined with ever increasing productivity, would we not be in a race to the bottom for the foreseeable future? At least until wages reached a world wide equilibrium? What kind of living standard would this result in? How would those who did manage to find employment afford housing, education, health care, educate the next generation of workers/citizens, etc? With diminished consumer purchasing power what incentive would there be to create jobs?
I just cannot comprehend how you think a system such as the one you espouse could possibly lead to a society where the majority of people would have a chance at a decent life. I remain open to being convinced, but what you have posted so far leaves me skeptical in the extreme.