[palmer]

I presume common defense justifies forfeiting some freedom. "Security" is ill-defined and probably has little to do with real security (protection from people who take lives or property). I agree it's not worth giving up freedom (e.g. 4th amendment) for such security (e.g. catch criminals more easily).

On the economic side, I think it's a tougher call. Some property is already taken for the common defense. Penalizing success through unemployment tax is the same necessary evil with some redistribution aspects (not a good thing) and some smoothing of economy over regions and over time (which I consider a good thing). Furthermore, the country's manufacturing base has defense value and is often hit harder in economic cycles because it is physical. Preserving that work force to some extent helps the country survive over the long run.

[Reagan Renaissance]

You are a hopeless socialist. And you are wrong.

Government compulsion is the antithesis of freedom. A vote for compulsory unemployment insurance is one step into slavery. After you have taken the first step, history says you will end up a slave. Then there are only two questions that matter: How long will it take before you realize you are a slave? Will someone else fight for their freedom and free you in the process?

If there were no minimum wage and no department of labor, there would be no unemployment. History says your own government is the single greatest threat to your own security. Like the frog, you are being boiled alive and haven't realized it.