Lazy people will always be lazy, and they exist, unfortunately, in all tax brackets. Hard workers will always be hard workers, and the problem with your viewpoint is that the overwhelming majority of them never see fabulous wealth. The overwhelming majority. There are statistics to prove my point, but it'd be an exercise in futility to seek them out, as you have your viewpoint and I have mine.
I believe that our government is over large and I agree that its funds are spent in the wrong way. Most Americans are opposed to the drug war, but at the same time, most Americans want a strong military. Strong does not have to mean large or overfunded.
Job creation is a field which should be left to the private sector. The government should not be a major employer. I'm sure we agree on this. However, I feel that companies which export jobs, thereby exporting exponential tax revenue as well as killing jobs as a byproduct, they should be penalized with higher taxes than those who don't. A simple bracket system based on earnings has time and again proven ineffective, with companies reporting negative earnings despite being profitable.
It's known that money spent on Main Street has more positive net effects on the economy than money spent on Wall Street. Therefore, more jobs are necessary. The way to do this is to incentivize the creation of jobs without creating the jobs via the government. A way this can be done is to lower a company's tax liability incrementally in proportion to the number of jobs it sustainably creates. One-time tax credits do not cut it. The amount of growth one good-paying job can produce far outweighs the number of tax dollars lost to a nanny state that has lost its bearings. If a company creates one job that puts X dollars into the economy, the company should then have .25X or .5X dollars less tax liability than the next company. Then it becomes a race to the top instead of a race to the bottom, and having most of your labor overseas can become a real financial problem. Likewise, penalties for exporting labor should be something like 2.5X dollars lost to the economy. Penalties for cutting jobs should only be imposed when the company is unable to prove an actual necessity for cutting said jobs -- that is, the hours are not simply shifted onto less workers.
At the same time, the NLRB should be given exponentially more authority than it has now. If a company acts in a way that violates the right to free association, a practice which regularly breaks unions before they are even born, that company should be eliminated from the economy.
Companies with less than 20 employees should be exempt from the federal minimum wage. Companies which pay more than twice the minimum wage should be rewarded additional tax benefits. The minimum wage should be tied to inflation, not used as a political football a couple times a decade. No matter what old people say, the fact is that most people on minimum wage are not teenagers. And that shouldn't matter anyway, what does that teach teenagers? The value of your time should be instilled from a very young age. We've got the opposite going on with the technological revolution. People value their time very little anymore. Just look at the practice of trolling.
I hate to tell you but true freedom would be pure communism. That's just the way it is. Freedom from need is about as close as it gets for human beings. Everyone having some ownership of the means of production would be the only way to create true freedom. Otherwise, forget about it. I don't care about freedom as much as I care about opportunity. I want my son to grow up in a world festering with opportunity. I want him to have the freedom I did not so many years ago -- quit a job Friday, start a job Tuesday. Board an airplane ten minutes before it takes off. I want a level playing field for him. An end to cronyism at all levels would be a good start. Elimination of the fraternity system at all state colleges. And so on.
Guess I'm rambling now. Good post, though.