This is exactly the situation the fourth ammendment was intended to address. Read it lately? It places limits on government surveilance, and it does so for a reason.
For governments to perform their essential duty they need to perform surveillance on the bad guys.
This is in dispute? But what constitutes a 'bad guy'? A rather ill defined term you are using here. I would suppose that you think of yourself as being a 'bad guy' are since your financial activities, for example, are being surveiled. Why else would the government have your activities under surveilance unless at you are one of the 'bad guys'? As for me, I am not among the 'bad guys' and find it quite objectionable that everything from my banking transactions to my travel is under constant government surveilance. This is antithetical to both freedom and liberty. If you cannot understand this, then we have nothing in comon.
Drop the sarcasm, cutie, I just read it again the other day as it happens. Yes it places limits, but I don't particularly think that it is a search and seizure for the government to have a record of my moving chunks of cash around in $20,000 increments.
As far as your overwhelming fear that the government is infringing on your personal liberty, our forming a state in the first place requires that we sacrifice an amount of our natural perfect liberty.... it is all a matter of balance and negotiation after that and it is NOT a given that every drop of liberty sacrificed is liberty that is stolen. Read any Locke lately? He was a favorite of the Founders...