Many of my friends are worried about their future and that of our nation. This is surely understandable. Jobs are insecure, retirement funds are dissipating, and our governments are poised to become significantly more intrusive and constraining.

As a result of these obvious problems, many fear that American policies are moving us toward the European welfare state. Other people, of course, celebrate our “progressive” direction and view our economic crisis as a necessary precursor to and motivator of much needed reform.

Belief that our, or indeed any democratic, government can manage an economy defies my understanding. Perhaps it resembles the purchase of lottery tickets, a triumph of hope over experience and logic. The fact that I’ve never won the lottery doesn’t mean I won’t someday. The fact that governmental management has never worked as planned doesn’t mean it won’t this time.

Desperate people desperately want to believe that political solutions to economic losses and their social consequences exist, will be found, and will be enacted. I believe they are way too optimistic. First, someone will actually win the lottery. Further, the lottery is a voluntarily accepted individual tax on hope and stupidity. In contrast, the taxes and future costs imposed by government are diffused on all. Even those who don’t pay directly suffer indirectly. Frictions and inhibitions on enhanced productivity and innovation always accompany political management.

Those who pay no income taxes may soon be a majority, a frightful prospect indeed. According to the Tax Foundation, in 2006, the top 5 percent of earners paid over 60 percent of all income taxes, the top 10 percent more than 70 percent. The bottom 50 percent paid less than 3 percent.

The bottom group may soon receive cash payments from the federal government. This means that half the population may see additional government as free. And when the cost is zero, the demand for government transfers and services is unbounded. The long run implications are dire for it fosters the plundering of our most productive citizens.

This month the official national debt has just exceeded $11 trillion. But this is a serious underestimate. If we include the government's off-the-balance sheet liabilities and unfunded retirement and healthcare obligations, the real national debt is actually $56 trillion, or $483,000 per U.S. household. And this neglects the underfunded liabilities of state and local governments and federally guaranteed corporate retirement accounts.

All of this is really quite dire. Alas it gets worse. American International Group illustrates my point, and not because of the understandable furor over the outrageous $165 million “bonuses” contractually awarded to 73 employees. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Senator Chris Dodd approved these contracts, although both now dodge responsibility.

My main concern is not the duplicity and opportunism of politicians, that’s their normal behavior. However, the confiscation of wealth from the pariah group of 73 via a special “super tax” poses a huge risk to all. Instead, we should heed President Obama’s admonition of February 24, “that in a time of crisis, we cannot afford to govern out of anger, or yield to the politics of the moment.”

Greater than the problems that are receiving so much attention is the assault on constitutional principles posed by the attempts to seize the bonuses via the “super tax” working as a bill of attainder.

A constitution is the body of rules governing the making of rules. In designing ours, the founders were highly sensitive to the prospect of vindictive responses to groups that stirred great passions. For this reason, we have Article I, s. 9 of the U.S. Constitution. It says that: “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

A bill of attainder is a legislative act inflicting punishment without a judicial trial. “They are generally directed against individuals by name, but may be directed against a class, and may inflict punishment absolutely or conditionally.”

I find it impossible to sympathize with the recipients of the AIG bonuses, and indeed find their exploitative behavior deplorable. However, if Congress can seize their contracted funds, which despised group is safe? Once we cheer, or even accept, the propriety of politicians targeting offending groups, we are all at risk. Who’s next?