The fly in the ointment is that immigrants vote to keep the welfare state, so the more you let in the harder it is to implement Friedman's solution.
Stopping immigration is a prerequisite of shrinking the welfare state. There is no getting around the immigration issue. If it isn't controlled the United States will end up at the global mean for liberty, a considerable decline.
Thanks for your reply and yes to the Milton Friedman comparison. For more comparison and why I disagree strongly with Trump on economics, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DhagKyvDck )
Here’s where we disagree:
>>Stopping immigration is a prerequisite of shrinking the welfare state.
It’s a very small proportion as I’ve said before. The welfare state has and would continue to be the same American-destroying problem. We are adding to the welfare state without even considering immigrants. It is the root problem, the cause; the rest is results.
What I would support for help in the short term is stricter e-verify and penalties for visa overstay, which I believe all the candidates do. I would add laws, ideally constitutional amendments, that prevent anyone who has ever entered the country illegally from becoming citizens or getting work permits.
Regarding the big welfare state increase: Trump is also weak on healthcare. His past is quite shaky and he has come very late to the positions of conservatives; it doesn’t inspire trust in his real views. (I would repeat this for pretty much all of Trump’s policies.)
As you have likely gathered, I’m solid conservative. I think conservative principles and governing philosophy are the answer. So, I’m one of those who opposes Trump for those reasons.
Thanks very much for your courteous discussion. I appreciate your views.