Sociopolitical classification

I seem to have been asked this a fair bit, and I figure I should just put an answer up somewhere where I can point to it - vice having to go through it all at irregular (yet irritatingly frequent!) intervals.

Granted, anyone who pays attention to what I say all the time should be able to suss this out on their own (I have what many view as an irritating tendency to say pretty much what I'm thinking at any given time, unless you just do not need to know) but I guess that's not enough.

Politically, I believe government:
- Should be small. The smaller, the better. It should be just enough to administer the needs of the body politic as a whole, to protect the body politic (as a whole!) and to carry on international congress with the interests of the body politic in mind.
- Should be just large enough to provide truly essential sociopolitical services - infrastructure, public safety, public well-being, and the like. Current service can - and damned well should be - trimmed mightily (as should "civil service" personnel. Granted, there's not much service, and the ones I've dealt with seem to be rarely civil...)
- Should only take what they need to function. There's no particular reason that the total tax bite, at ALL levels, should not exceed ten percent of median income. Yep - including vehicle registration, sales taxes, property taxes, ...
- Should only be allowed to spend the money they can generate through a minimal tax bite. "Deficit spending" is essentially illegal for a private citizen, why should it be legal for governments?
- Should neither pay their elected representatives, nor should they be considered as 'full-time' employ. "Public service" should be precisely that. No retirement, either. No special plans for healtcare and the like. And, you can travel commercial with the rest of us plebes.
- Should be responsible for its actions. "Legislative Immunity" is overused. You want to declare war? You get right out front with everyone else (at a rank not higher than, say, corporal - unless you have prior service and are willing to lead from the front.) You espouse a measure that causes trouble for us? Get ready to be prosecuted for it. So much stupidity comes out of Washington because they can't be held responsible for it. Let legislative immunity stand internationally - but domestically, you can get clobbered. Kinda like diplomatic immunity, but reversed.

Socially? I look for a return of the Social Contract (the unwritten rules of "polite society") to replace the onerous system of laws we have now. Then, wholesale redaction of the laws. There's no reason that the entire body of law to which a person is subject shouldn't fit into a small-to-middlin' paperback book.

Economically? This may sound counter-intuitive, but the basic system should be capitalist with just a bit of socialism mixed in. "Socialism," you say! "That's awful and un-American!"

Not so. No less august a personage than Thomas Paine advocated limited socialism in a capitalist system when he wrote _Common_ _Sense_. The "limited socialism" I advocate is essentially the same as his - pensions for the aged and disabled. Limit payouts to those who actually contributed and/or are citizens (after redaction or total rescinsion of the "anchor baby" laws,) and we can keep it under control rather handily.

Given the current climate of the industry (the industry itself and the litigious nature of the populace,) and MediCare isn't a bad idea, either. Yes, medical industry reform needs to happen - but, as Congress is going about it, I don't expect it to be useful. I know I can get verbose at times, but even I would have a hard time putting out a 1,900-page document on a single subject!

Unemployment? OK, in a limited sense. Social Welfare? Ditto. No-one should stay on either programme for more than a year without some exceptional circumstances being involved. And, I've got my ideas for reform on the latter, if we're going to keep it

Discuss.