These are clearly the two extremes, some Government is essential. Too much government is stifling .. too little government is anarchy. I am not exactly in the middle, I lean toward less government in a big way, but the just listing the extremes is a bit polarizing if not totally provocative.
I don't have enough time today (or most days) to work on a proper explanation of my views. I will defer to Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, since they are far smarter and eloquent than I'll ever be and they have already written about it.
Regarding Limited Government, Rockwell writes: "The next time you find yourself insisting that we need to keep government limited, ask yourself why it never, ever stays that way. Might you be chasing a unicorn?"
Excellent Point
Dave, the problem with Anarcho-Capitolism is that it minimizes the effects of human nature. It is just as Utopic as those who believe that Government is inherently good and will provide everything.
There will always be those who will seek advantage and cause harm to others, just as there will always be those who can not succeed without being guided by the hand. The human condition is not a consistent one and populace type governance is always subject to the slick tongue of the potential tyrant.
Bea, Howard can speak for himself, but it appears he was looking more for the direction one leans, not that either side was their absolute belief.
When I said polarizing or totally provocative, it was the poll was clearly designed to stimulate an Intellectual debate and draw out the critical thinkers.
Yeah, it falls in the middle, but I had to choose the "*primarily* source of good" because:
- It has defended us from foreign aggressors (Defense);
- It has provided a means for the elderly and infirm to afford to live (somewhat) comfortable lives (SocSec);
- It has provided a means for the sick to get health care (Medicaid/Medicare/ACA)
- The roads might have some pot holes, but there are roads!;
- Our food is kept (relatively) safe for eating. Got an issue with this one? Fine - try living on things supplied by Chinese companies with their lack of safety checks and get back to me in a year... that's if you haven't managed to get some bad milk, toothpaste, etc...;
- It has provided forces to keep the streets (relatively) safe (Police);
- It has provided forces to fight fires and help prevent fires;
- It even helped set up this wonderful series of tubes ("And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material") that is the foundation of this poll and its comments.
The majority of members of the 112th and 113th Congress are burdensome. A general lack of cooperation and partisan grandstanding impedes the ability of people to improve their lives. Despite Congress there are hundreds of federal departments that regularly help people improve their lives: http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/
Not utopian. The point is that the state (Government) always becomes corrupt eventually and always demands allegiance and tax in some form or another from its subjects. It is a self-serving beast which must consume and control. You're correct "There will always be those who will seek advantage and cause harm to others" I'm tired of having them seize my money and property, or threaten to.
Actually, you are making my point: if the human condition is not consistent and we will always be subject to slick tongues and oppression of tyrants, then why bother trying? Let people work things out with each other. But, I'm sure I am just wasting time here.
Dave, My point was that the same human nature applies to both government and individuals. You are not wasting your time, I actually lean far closer to your premise than you may think. Short of the absolute absence of Government.
The battle over the individual and government is ageless, and is a pendulum in my view. Balance is the goal, Our founding fathers in their wisdom seemed to be of the same mind [State, Fed, Individual] [Executive, legislative, judiciary} It's all about the quest for balance, absolute balance is as unattainable as utopia or anarco-capitalism, but as long as we strive for that balance we are on a good path, it is when we accept an imbalance that we are in peril.
Balance in no way is the middle, nor is it the extreme.
I would say then, that it is apparent the United States has accepted an imbalance. The state has more power over local government than ever before, the Federal Gov. has more power over the states than ever before, the Executive branch has more power than ever before and corporate money has more sway than individual voters. It's gone bad, and the sooner we accept that and start over, the better.
It is absolutely immoral by the way to continue to steal the opportunity to live free without the burden of a big hungry government from future generations, which is exactly what gets worse every-time any government incurs debt.
Government [G] is an imperfect control mechanism for an already imperfect system [S]. Both G and S operate with inherent overhead [O] noted as O-g and O-s. If we conclude that some level of G is needed in order to maintain the effective operation of S, the question then becomes just how much O-g is acceptable to minimize the losses O-s in S?
The more complex G becomes, the greater the O-g. Unfortunately, as O-g increases, O-s does not necessarily decrease. As with most complex systems, there is likely a sweet spot where an optimally constructed G facilitates an effectively functioning S.
What we have in Los Estados Unidos today ain't it! The New York State G certainly isn't optimized, nor is the Genesee County G! G as it boils down locally is unequivocally not helping people improve their lives. Batavia isn't flourishing. Genesee County isn't flourishing. New York State isn't flourishing. But G at all levels sure is.
The answers were taken straight from a recent national poll question (I didn't link to the article because it was something deep in side the article.)
Either you're the type of person who believes that government is inherently good or inherently bad.
Myself, I'm on the bad side.
Progressives seem to believe government is necessary to check the bad things bad people do, but they have a general faith that humanity is good.
I believe most people are good, but there's no way to tell how a little bit of power might corrupt a person's otherwise good intentions. In the long run, government is a product of the people in it, and the more people in it with more and greater power means inevitable more and greater destruction.
I find people who like government, who have no problem giving government more and greater power completely baffling. The costs of big government far outweigh the benefits of big government programs.
While I tend toward the logic of Mark that anarchy is a utopian fantasy, I'd rather push for anarchy than sit by ideally as people all around me try to build bigger government.
Yes, some government is necessary, but the pendulum has swung tremendously too far in the big government direction. It's time to dial it back if we want to survive as a republic and as a civilization.
Just about everything state and federal governments do in the 21st Century could be done better and for less money at a local level or not done at all.
It's somewhere in between, depending on what your wants and needs are at any given time. And there are vast differences in feelings about the Federal, State, and local governments
Hey C.M., BTW it is more than Congress that is a burden. It is all of them. Reed and Pres. Obama failed to work with Congress and what was that outcome. Amazing that, Democrats are now agreeing with what the Republicans were asking for in reference to ACA/Obamacare. This whole government shutdown is due to those two not listening to just the Republicans but, the American People too. Our current budget has passed only because, the Republicans do not want another shutdown. So what does that mean for the working man? A tax increase of 8-10% for the average American and a more tax breaks for the wealthy. Someone has to pay for the handouts for the lazies of society (I am not referring to the truly disable or elderly ) so, it is the workers who will pay. BTW, was not Obama against tax breaks for the wealthy? Which goes to show that no matter what side of the idle you follow, they are in it together.
Our government has been self-serving longer than just the past 8 years. They have been that way for at least the last 4 decades. However we just keep going with the status quo and telling ourselves there nothing we can do to change it.
Heck the national budget should include the removal of our government's "Golden Parachute and exemptions!" What is good enough for you and I, is good enough for them.
My point of the other day illustrated through the comments... As long as people do not believe that they need to hold themselves to an higher ideal, decay of ANY system is running at 1:1 odds... People used to actually be concerned about how honorable their neighbors knew them to be. THAT is where the majority of people placed their personal 'pride'. Since then, material items of all sorts have become the idols of the majority. Cars, houses, jewelry, fashion, the latest phone, sneakers worth taking a life for, etc., etc., ad nauseum...
People stopped worshiping the Creator and began worshiping the created. The same thing happened in ancient Israel, and we are watching God give this nation all of the same warnings that He gave them. In the end, we will either suffer the same fate they did, or we will bring our nation back to Him and restore our position as a city upon a hill. There are no other options, so we must all decide which one of these two we will leave for OUR posterity.
In less than fifty years, your kids and grandkids will have to make a choice between becoming Muslim, or facing the alternative. How long are we going to sit here bickering about things that really don't matter?
The most important part of government is foreign policy... If we are doing that right, the country's issues will resolve themselves, but our hearts must be right, or it won't work...
One warped measure of legislative success is the making of laws. The media has been hammering our current Congress because they have passed the FEWEST laws in decades. They are pointing to that as a failure. I call it a rousing success. Passing laws is not a measure of productivity, structuring an environment of opportunity with the LEAST amount of laws is the mark of a functioning body.
John - your Fox version of the ACA is pretty good. Inaccurate by all accounts, but a pretty good parroting of Fox.
The Administration and the Dems in Congress tried for 3 months to get the GOP to work on the ACA. The GOP did what it has been doing best since Jan 2009 - nothing... So the ACA went through without the GOP input. The GOP took a chance, and lost.
That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.
So for all "rammed down our throats" crowd...161 bites of what passed your lips was of the GOP flavor.
Here a good story of how great New York State is at spending your money...Watch and learn....When you have to give back to the government 50% of your money every year ,you have a problem..
Actually Tim I watch CNN, MSNBC and Fox. You are right they tried 3 times with their terms only. Once again fighting Congress and the majority of Americans on delaying Obamacare. So, once again tell me how their 3 attempts would have complied with that? It seems to me even the liberal networks were bashing the democrats on not delaying the ACA due to all the issues. So, thank you for drinking more of the liberal BS kool-aid.
Second, look at the recent budget being past how the middle class is being screwed again between the so call privileged of society and laziness of society. We are going to see between an 8-10% tax increase which is not just stated by Fox, it is on CNN as well. How about the tax break Obama gave the wealthy? Was not he against that? YES, okay, I thought so. So, if Reed and Obama did try to negotiate with Congress how come we are in this dilemma?
I do like Sean Hannity since, he let's all sides speak unlike liberal talk shows. I do not care for Rush or Wolf.
Tim no matter how you try and spin it. It comes down to the Government whether it is Left, Center, Right it still is the same. Obama and Reed pushed for Obamacare to go through on time. Which oh no it didn't and Obama claimed he was just as shock as the nation. Which is just another piece of evidence that Obama should not be a leader. He sucks and honestly many politicians do. Obamacare's benefits are not an improvement for everyone. If, it is so awesome, again tell me why the President, Senate or Congress, DO NOT HAVE TO COMPLY AND ARE EXEMPT? Seems to me that, Debbie and you cannot explain this because, let's be honest, you cannot.
BTW, I am on the side of the majority of Americans and not Fox, CNN, MSNBC, liberals, democrats, conservatives, republicans, socialists, tea party, etc......
Obamacare/ACA needs to be removed and rewritten. Then exemption for all government need to be removed and mandatory compliance (including the wealthy paying a 75% of medical cost deductible; middle and lower class paying $25-$50 deductible) needs to be from the President to Tiny Tim. Since, the rich profit from the middle and lower classes and would not exist without us, they can afford to pay more.
Digging deep on this one? I
Digging deep on this one? I can't even vote because I'm In the middle of the 2 suggestions..Nice try though
The result of this poll is
The result of this poll is predetermined. It doesn't take a critical thinker to know where the readers will go..
When government takes away
When government takes away God and guns from its own people, it is tyrannny. This country was formed on both.
These are clearly the two
These are clearly the two extremes, some Government is essential. Too much government is stifling .. too little government is anarchy. I am not exactly in the middle, I lean toward less government in a big way, but the just listing the extremes is a bit polarizing if not totally provocative.
Ideally, government is
Ideally, government is primarily a source of good and helps people improve their lives.
Realistically, it is a burdensome part of society that impedes the ability of people to improve their lives.
Mark, would you say that
Mark, would you say that those who make the decision between the two are the fringe elements?
I don't have enough time
I don't have enough time today (or most days) to work on a proper explanation of my views. I will defer to Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, since they are far smarter and eloquent than I'll ever be and they have already written about it.
Regarding Limited Government, Rockwell writes: "The next time you find yourself insisting that we need to keep government limited, ask yourself why it never, ever stays that way. Might you be chasing a unicorn?"
Excellent Point
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/lew-rockwell/lew-rockwell-admits-it/
Dave, the problem with
Dave, the problem with Anarcho-Capitolism is that it minimizes the effects of human nature. It is just as Utopic as those who believe that Government is inherently good and will provide everything.
There will always be those who will seek advantage and cause harm to others, just as there will always be those who can not succeed without being guided by the hand. The human condition is not a consistent one and populace type governance is always subject to the slick tongue of the potential tyrant.
Bea, Howard can speak for
Bea, Howard can speak for himself, but it appears he was looking more for the direction one leans, not that either side was their absolute belief.
When I said polarizing or totally provocative, it was the poll was clearly designed to stimulate an Intellectual debate and draw out the critical thinkers.
I to am not gonna participate
I to am not gonna participate in this as I feel the reality falls in the middle of these 2 extremes.
Yeah, it falls in the middle,
Yeah, it falls in the middle, but I had to choose the "*primarily* source of good" because:
- It has defended us from foreign aggressors (Defense);
- It has provided a means for the elderly and infirm to afford to live (somewhat) comfortable lives (SocSec);
- It has provided a means for the sick to get health care (Medicaid/Medicare/ACA)
- The roads might have some pot holes, but there are roads!;
- Our food is kept (relatively) safe for eating. Got an issue with this one? Fine - try living on things supplied by Chinese companies with their lack of safety checks and get back to me in a year... that's if you haven't managed to get some bad milk, toothpaste, etc...;
- It has provided forces to keep the streets (relatively) safe (Police);
- It has provided forces to fight fires and help prevent fires;
- It even helped set up this wonderful series of tubes ("And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material") that is the foundation of this poll and its comments.
Tim, There are those that
Tim,
There are those that would dispute every point that you have made.
53% of the American population has always been against the ACA and that number is growing.
Some feel that our interventionism is what placed us in peril in the first place
Some would say that we should prepare ourselves for old age not rely on government.
Some believe that we have way too much in the way of police presence
Etc. Etc. Etc.
That doesn't mean necessarily true or false, but the absolute middle may not be far enough from totalitarianism or close enough to personal liberty
The majority of members of
The majority of members of the 112th and 113th Congress are burdensome. A general lack of cooperation and partisan grandstanding impedes the ability of people to improve their lives. Despite Congress there are hundreds of federal departments that regularly help people improve their lives: http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/
Not utopian. The point is
Not utopian. The point is that the state (Government) always becomes corrupt eventually and always demands allegiance and tax in some form or another from its subjects. It is a self-serving beast which must consume and control. You're correct "There will always be those who will seek advantage and cause harm to others" I'm tired of having them seize my money and property, or threaten to.
Actually, you are making my point: if the human condition is not consistent and we will always be subject to slick tongues and oppression of tyrants, then why bother trying? Let people work things out with each other. But, I'm sure I am just wasting time here.
Dave, My point was that the
Dave, My point was that the same human nature applies to both government and individuals. You are not wasting your time, I actually lean far closer to your premise than you may think. Short of the absolute absence of Government.
The battle over the individual and government is ageless, and is a pendulum in my view. Balance is the goal, Our founding fathers in their wisdom seemed to be of the same mind [State, Fed, Individual] [Executive, legislative, judiciary} It's all about the quest for balance, absolute balance is as unattainable as utopia or anarco-capitalism, but as long as we strive for that balance we are on a good path, it is when we accept an imbalance that we are in peril.
Balance in no way is the middle, nor is it the extreme.
Someone's gotta build the
Someone's gotta build the roads.
I would say then, that it is
I would say then, that it is apparent the United States has accepted an imbalance. The state has more power over local government than ever before, the Federal Gov. has more power over the states than ever before, the Executive branch has more power than ever before and corporate money has more sway than individual voters. It's gone bad, and the sooner we accept that and start over, the better.
It is absolutely immoral by the way to continue to steal the opportunity to live free without the burden of a big hungry government from future generations, which is exactly what gets worse every-time any government incurs debt.
Government [G] is an
Government [G] is an imperfect control mechanism for an already imperfect system [S]. Both G and S operate with inherent overhead [O] noted as O-g and O-s. If we conclude that some level of G is needed in order to maintain the effective operation of S, the question then becomes just how much O-g is acceptable to minimize the losses O-s in S?
The more complex G becomes, the greater the O-g. Unfortunately, as O-g increases, O-s does not necessarily decrease. As with most complex systems, there is likely a sweet spot where an optimally constructed G facilitates an effectively functioning S.
What we have in Los Estados Unidos today ain't it! The New York State G certainly isn't optimized, nor is the Genesee County G! G as it boils down locally is unequivocally not helping people improve their lives. Batavia isn't flourishing. Genesee County isn't flourishing. New York State isn't flourishing. But G at all levels sure is.
The answers were taken
The answers were taken straight from a recent national poll question (I didn't link to the article because it was something deep in side the article.)
Either you're the type of person who believes that government is inherently good or inherently bad.
Myself, I'm on the bad side.
Progressives seem to believe government is necessary to check the bad things bad people do, but they have a general faith that humanity is good.
I believe most people are good, but there's no way to tell how a little bit of power might corrupt a person's otherwise good intentions. In the long run, government is a product of the people in it, and the more people in it with more and greater power means inevitable more and greater destruction.
I find people who like government, who have no problem giving government more and greater power completely baffling. The costs of big government far outweigh the benefits of big government programs.
While I tend toward the logic of Mark that anarchy is a utopian fantasy, I'd rather push for anarchy than sit by ideally as people all around me try to build bigger government.
Yes, some government is necessary, but the pendulum has swung tremendously too far in the big government direction. It's time to dial it back if we want to survive as a republic and as a civilization.
Just about everything state and federal governments do in the 21st Century could be done better and for less money at a local level or not done at all.
It's somewhere in between,
It's somewhere in between, depending on what your wants and needs are at any given time. And there are vast differences in feelings about the Federal, State, and local governments
Well said Howard, and pretty
Well said Howard, and pretty much the same as I feel
Hey C.M., BTW it is more than
Hey C.M., BTW it is more than Congress that is a burden. It is all of them. Reed and Pres. Obama failed to work with Congress and what was that outcome. Amazing that, Democrats are now agreeing with what the Republicans were asking for in reference to ACA/Obamacare. This whole government shutdown is due to those two not listening to just the Republicans but, the American People too. Our current budget has passed only because, the Republicans do not want another shutdown. So what does that mean for the working man? A tax increase of 8-10% for the average American and a more tax breaks for the wealthy. Someone has to pay for the handouts for the lazies of society (I am not referring to the truly disable or elderly ) so, it is the workers who will pay. BTW, was not Obama against tax breaks for the wealthy? Which goes to show that no matter what side of the idle you follow, they are in it together.
Our government has been self-serving longer than just the past 8 years. They have been that way for at least the last 4 decades. However we just keep going with the status quo and telling ourselves there nothing we can do to change it.
Heck the national budget
Heck the national budget should include the removal of our government's "Golden Parachute and exemptions!" What is good enough for you and I, is good enough for them.
Here is a little fuel for the
Here is a little fuel for the fire:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166535/record-high-say-big-government-greate…?
My point of the other day
My point of the other day illustrated through the comments... As long as people do not believe that they need to hold themselves to an higher ideal, decay of ANY system is running at 1:1 odds... People used to actually be concerned about how honorable their neighbors knew them to be. THAT is where the majority of people placed their personal 'pride'. Since then, material items of all sorts have become the idols of the majority. Cars, houses, jewelry, fashion, the latest phone, sneakers worth taking a life for, etc., etc., ad nauseum...
People stopped worshiping the Creator and began worshiping the created. The same thing happened in ancient Israel, and we are watching God give this nation all of the same warnings that He gave them. In the end, we will either suffer the same fate they did, or we will bring our nation back to Him and restore our position as a city upon a hill. There are no other options, so we must all decide which one of these two we will leave for OUR posterity.
In less than fifty years, your kids and grandkids will have to make a choice between becoming Muslim, or facing the alternative. How long are we going to sit here bickering about things that really don't matter?
The most important part of government is foreign policy... If we are doing that right, the country's issues will resolve themselves, but our hearts must be right, or it won't work...
One warped measure of
One warped measure of legislative success is the making of laws. The media has been hammering our current Congress because they have passed the FEWEST laws in decades. They are pointing to that as a failure. I call it a rousing success. Passing laws is not a measure of productivity, structuring an environment of opportunity with the LEAST amount of laws is the mark of a functioning body.
You're absolutely right,
You're absolutely right, Jeff.
John - your Fox version of
John - your Fox version of the ACA is pretty good. Inaccurate by all accounts, but a pretty good parroting of Fox.
The Administration and the Dems in Congress tried for 3 months to get the GOP to work on the ACA. The GOP did what it has been doing best since Jan 2009 - nothing... So the ACA went through without the GOP input. The GOP took a chance, and lost.
Actually there WAS GOP input
Actually there WAS GOP input in the ACA...161 GOP amendments.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescriptions/2009/07/t…
That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.
So for all "rammed down our throats" crowd...161 bites of what passed your lips was of the GOP flavor.
GOP - Dem. Right - Left.
GOP - Dem. Right - Left. Blah blah blah, you are all the same. Even the king of all bullshit artists and Hypocrite in Chief says so.
http://www.popularresistance.org/obama-tells-ceos-not-much-difference-w…
Here a good story of how
Here a good story of how great New York State is at spending your money...Watch and learn....When you have to give back to the government 50% of your money every year ,you have a problem..
http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/2013/12/18/new-york-state-public-a…
But Mark they enhance your
But Mark they enhance your life. Can't you feel it?
Actually Tim I watch CNN,
Actually Tim I watch CNN, MSNBC and Fox. You are right they tried 3 times with their terms only. Once again fighting Congress and the majority of Americans on delaying Obamacare. So, once again tell me how their 3 attempts would have complied with that? It seems to me even the liberal networks were bashing the democrats on not delaying the ACA due to all the issues. So, thank you for drinking more of the liberal BS kool-aid.
Second, look at the recent budget being past how the middle class is being screwed again between the so call privileged of society and laziness of society. We are going to see between an 8-10% tax increase which is not just stated by Fox, it is on CNN as well. How about the tax break Obama gave the wealthy? Was not he against that? YES, okay, I thought so. So, if Reed and Obama did try to negotiate with Congress how come we are in this dilemma?
I do like Sean Hannity since, he let's all sides speak unlike liberal talk shows. I do not care for Rush or Wolf.
Tim no matter how you try and spin it. It comes down to the Government whether it is Left, Center, Right it still is the same. Obama and Reed pushed for Obamacare to go through on time. Which oh no it didn't and Obama claimed he was just as shock as the nation. Which is just another piece of evidence that Obama should not be a leader. He sucks and honestly many politicians do. Obamacare's benefits are not an improvement for everyone. If, it is so awesome, again tell me why the President, Senate or Congress, DO NOT HAVE TO COMPLY AND ARE EXEMPT? Seems to me that, Debbie and you cannot explain this because, let's be honest, you cannot.
BTW, I am on the side of the majority of Americans and not Fox, CNN, MSNBC, liberals, democrats, conservatives, republicans, socialists, tea party, etc......
Obamacare/ACA needs to be removed and rewritten. Then exemption for all government need to be removed and mandatory compliance (including the wealthy paying a 75% of medical cost deductible; middle and lower class paying $25-$50 deductible) needs to be from the President to Tiny Tim. Since, the rich profit from the middle and lower classes and would not exist without us, they can afford to pay more.