I think Scott hit the nail on the head when he talked about the paradox of people distrusting the government while demanding more government services. It is natural that we chafe against intrusive authority whether that intrusion is warranted or not. It is also natural that we turn toward our source of temporal support to fill our needs and wants, especially when we rely on a single source of support. Generally speaking, greater dependence warrants greater intrusion on the part of the supplier.
The paradox here is that individual liberty cannot thrive without personal independence. If we ever hope to be free of government intrusions – and the possibility (probability) that they will be exploited – we must begin to look outside of government for the solutions to the challenges that we face. If I fear that I will get laid off and that I can’t afford that, I will not want to end the government welfare programs. If I have enough savings, or I trust friends and family to help me out in the event that I lose my job, then I am more likely to want those programs terminated so that I keep more of my own money to increase my financial independence. The same holds true for other government programs as well as non-governmental dependence.