More on the consent of the governed

I heard a great example on today's Neal Boortz show in a discussion of homelessness and forced government charity. I went as follows.

Since we live (supposedly) in a country whose government operates on the consent of the governed, the government is supposed to operate according to 2 principles. One, it has the specific powers granted it through the Constitution. Two, being "of the People, for the People, and by the People", it may only do things that every individual citizen has the same ability or opportunity to do.

For the purposes of my commentary, I assume that the Constitution does not contain language giving the federal government the power to redistribute wealth or property, nor may it legislate "equality" in terms of wealth or property. I could present extensive documentation from our founding fathers to support the claim, but I will reserve that for another time.

Now, let's say you and I are walking down the street, and we come upon a homeless man. You have an absolute right to reach into your pocket and give that man some money, food, or anything else that is your legal property. As do I have the same right.

Does that mean I have a right to reach into your pocket and give the homeless man your property? Of course not, as do you not have the right to give him my property. This seems to be a simple concept upon which most people would agree.

However, many on the left and some on the right have developed a notion that if I hire an agent, i.e. the government, to reach into your pocket and take your property, it somehow becomes legitimate and acceptable. How is it that the government, which is supposed to operate on my behalf and in my interest, has a greater power over your property than do I individually while operating on my own behalf?

A similar example would be the possessions you have in your home. If you have 2 televisions, and have none, I am legally prohibited from entering your home and taking one of your televisions so that we have "equal" amounts. How, then, does it become permissible for the government to send an agent to your home whose intent it is do the very same thing which I may not do myself?