Could be a pragmatist since its pretty hard to tax a poor person.
Could be a conservative is subsidizing the poor is necessary to keep the poor from rioting and fomenting social unrest. The arch-conservative Otto von Bismark, Chancellor of Imperial Germany, created the world’s first social security system because the Left was clamoring for it to the point that Bismark feared a socialist revolution. Giving the socialists some of what they wanted sapped their support among the masses.
But if you couple 1 and 2 and do 2 to the point that the poor become lazy, you become a socialist.
Depends on what services you are talking about. If you own a car, then shouldn’t you be obligated to pay for the services provided by public roads? If you fish in public water or hunt on public land, shouldn’t you pay fees necessary to maintain that water and land?
Considering the mayhem that America has experienced over the past 60 years while Americans have turned their back on their historic Judeo-Christian values, the person would be a public enemy.
This would depend on whether or not the private industry is so driven by the profit motive that it leads to cutthroat competition, monopoly and a loss of consumer choice- or when the industry provides an essential product or service but large numbers of people cannot afford its product and service because the industry sells them to the highest bidder.
