Generally those that wish for fiscal liberalism are those that are trying to get out of paying as much tax as possible.

Personally I find I hit a dichotomy of philosophy with that one:

As a Doctor I treat patients. A large section are druggies, fatties, smokers and alcoholics. Of these the alcoholics and druggies are merely sucking money out of the country - it's £500 for an ambulance ride to A&E on average. Then there's the bed, the staff's time and then the drugs to (temporarily) bring them round. Some of these I see about 4 times a week, often by ambulance. Why the hell am I paying taxes to this? And of course I am only choosing one issue that I can directly view.

Then there's the Uber Rich. City types who get paid millions for... erm, moving numbers round a spreadsheet. Ah! They work long hours for high stress work - NEWSFLASH!! They aren't the only ones - and they work in very nice buildings for this. In America especially taxes are being abolished for these unsung heroes who apparently are suffering under the yoke of taxes. Hmmm...

So, am I truely advocating an increasing tax, but where the money is only spent on "deserving" causes? And who chooses these? Me? Do we then get into the situation where the time and money spent making sure that the money is well spent leads to the type of inefficiency in... werll, in Whitehall now you come to mention it!!!

government needs to be large enough to reign in the sharks that exist, and protect those that are genuinely in need. But so often governments grow with the QUANGO bloat that can rarely be reduced - how do you get the beaurocray to reduce itself???