Big Government, Small Government, No Government
Which do you prefer? To my knowledge these are the 3 ways of governing, if there is a way I missed, please fill me in.
I like small government. Less people to please (to address the cliche "you can’t please them all). More decisions are made about authentic problems. Democracy works pretty well with a small government. Small economy. The possibility of experimentation with different economic systems. More cultural variety among differing areas.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
With that being said I think that a government is essential to social systems, as a means of public welfare for its citizens. But there should be no government intervention into the economic market. Laws and regulations are important because they, again, act with the purpose of maintained societal welfare. But governments need to let markets control prices instead of inflating these bubbles with habitually low interest rates. People blame “big business” for corruption when it is a banking system that has been bankrupt by it’s government.
Sorry for the rant, ECON nerd here…
I have nothing against space travel, I just don’t think anyone should have the authority to govern the world. There is too much greed and inefficiency in big government, and the bigger a government gets the smaller the voice of the people are.
I agree with you Adam. We need some form of government, but I think the power of government should be very, very limited. IE no prohibition, no view on religions, etc. Government should work for the people not the other way around.
Children need parents. Not for rules, or laws, or the setting of our moral compases. We need parents for the opportunity that they provide for growth and the experience they provide for example.
Similarly, government is only needed until the people outgrow it. Its relative to the maturity of our race. We don’t need government to regulate our lives just like regulation parenting never works. Also, banns never work. When a child is told they cant have something, what it the natural reaction? Its always “Why?” and then they try to experience it to see what the big deal is. Its reverse psychology and it doesnt fucking work!
Small government focused on the justice system for serious offences (cut the war on drugs and other things that turn innocent people into criminals)and bettering its people. Or no government, if people could learn to live with integrity and compassion .
@Adam. There is already a global economy. The simple fact that currencies differ doesn’t change the goods being sold. Eastern countries produce, Western countries consume. Economies just like governments are a response to surroundings. When there is finally enough of a need for a global government – there will be a global government.
I hate government the way it is and would like to add another option to the list: Smart government. None of that bureaucratic bullshit, if things were just straight to the point it would fix a lot. We were talking in geometry today and we got to the topic of BMV. The teacher said
“When I was about your age I bought a car from my dad for about $10,000, but put on the paper that I only bought it for a couple thousand so to avoid taxes. (and driving expenses in general.) Well I went into the BMV, but forgot to have my dad sign where the previous owner is supposed to sign, so they denied it. My father lived about 40 miles away, so I said to the lady, “What is stopping me from going out and having some random guy sign for me?” She said “not a thing, we couldn’t do anything about it.” ”
Bureaucracy in my connotation means “Unnecessary steps in a corporation or business that add no additional benefit, or are redundant.” Signing the back of the slip is one of these steps, he could’ve walked outside and said “Hey my dad was outside” and had the paper signed by a random guy. Everything government related has these useless steps, from signing up your vehicle and taxes to filing for unemployment. We need a smart government designed FOR ALL the people, not just those who are big-shots in politics and big businesses.
Your saying communism. I find communism to be inherently impossible. Your counting on humans to have no ambition and greed. I agree that in a perfect world there would be no need for government. However the form of the universe is inherently imperfect.
Does the presence of government in the US prevent competition between corporations? On what do you base the belief that a single government would be such a catastrophe?
No government intervention? So monopolies are coolsauce then? Elimination of competition with duplicitous means is okay with you? Corporate intellectual property theft, corporate espionage, et cetera? No problem eh?
Took the words outta my mouth.
@Chris for one, we can get rid of lobbyists. The government is supposed to be made up of representatives who were voted into office by the people so they can solve issues the people want solved. There is no need for lobbyists at all, it is just blatant corruption. Also perhaps a time limit that has to go by before a person can go from being a business leader to being an elected official, or some other way of removing corporate ties from elected officials. The government is supposed to be loyal to the country only, not to corporations.
Also, people should do more to offer alternatives to the two traditional parties we have in America. Right now, all you see and hear on TV is Republicans or Democrats, and it is too expensive for common people to run for office using traditional advertising means. This leads to the oligarchy we have now. More common people need to try to get into office.
if we don’t have some sort of government, we will have anarchy! really … is most of the world willing/able to withstand that ? we need each other! all of us that have the means need to prepare for the worst need to do so. As for me and my family we are canning from our garden, storing items on sale, and making ready with tools of the trade, making a living on the natural distasers around us because we are doing what we need to do for our neighbors who don’t/won’t see what is comming! I will command an “army” ( people who want to survive) of those wo believe we can surivive! weather they prepare or not we will take them in. once full …. well prove yourself! and be prepared to be come under a nwo! This will be the ultimate of those who want to survive! we will not have the luxuary of the governomental bunkers! make friends with someone who is preparing for “what happens” after!
:) now what?
What about people who Lobby for LGBT rights? Lobbyists lobby for more than cigarettes and big oil.
There also are more than two political parties in the US, its up to their constituencies to vote them into office. Its up to them to set up campaign offices. You could be the first HEthen in the White House.
I guess big govt in some ways and small govt in other ways. For example, I believe in paying taxes so that we can all have roads and health care and drinkable water. Leave it up to the individual and too many selfish people won’t share. Also, without regulations, many things, such as nuclear power stations will not be safe (they barely are now). Stategovt is fine, but not all states have the same number of resources. However, I do not want the govt to tell me what to do with my body; there are some rights that the gov should not mess with. I think drugs should be legal but regulated.
I’ve noticed that the world is moving towards a far more interdependent structure. I’ll venture a guess to say that within the next 100 years well have a one world government. While this will instill fear, terror, and other Orwellian emotions, (and probably a few 1984 quotes), I look at this as an end to war, and the next step in human governance.
Hopefully an enlightened world that’s taking baby steps exploring the cosmos. I just wish I could live to see it, and who knows. With the strides modern medicine is taking, maybe I will live to see it.
Oh yeah, the point of this topic. I support Big Government.
@Chris “What about people who Lobby for LGBT rights? Lobbyists lobby for more than cigarettes and big oil.”
Good point, I actually didn’t know that people did lobby for things such as LGBT rights. However, I still think lobbyists are a problem because you only have to look at the results to see which lobbyists are the most effective. Most states still don’t allow same-sex marriage, while cigarettes are still quite legal long after being proven both harmful and intentionally addictive, and oil companies are still receiving massive subsidies (which we taxpayers are contributing to, Big Oil screws us thrice) despite both record profits and record gas prices. This alone should have people rioting in the street.
People don’t need lobbyists to secure LGBT rights, or any other progressive cause. They only need to really think about the issues and apply logic/common sense. We all have it.
As corporations have the biggest affect on the economy and the strength of the economy affects all our standard of living/quality of life, the law tends to sacrifice the right of the individual to create the conditions for commerce, industry and the corporate sector to flourish. I think most of us are ignorant to the scale of the sacrifice of individual rights for this cause. But is it worth it? Perhaps less rights equals a better life for us all.
But courts can make laws, we need governments to maintain social infrastructure because the moment they privatize that is when you are charged a toll the moment you step out of your home. A closed boom-gate society, they will have electronic tags on your car so that every street you drive down you will be scanned and debited.
That is just a basic example of what we will have to pay for, it runs much deeper. But this sounds okay, you are not taxed persay and you are only charged for what you use, but rich or poor you pay the same. Rich seem to pay more tax but the percentage is about the same. In a closed boom-gate society the percentage of a toll compared to a rich persons salary would be negligable as a minimal wage earner will be forking out a significant chunk of their pay.
This will help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But also the fact that businesses use the roads most of all so they will pay the most, out of their profits, so to compensate they will raise prices, inflation across the board.
Conclusion: We need taxes and government to maintain infrastructure and this open boom-gate society we enjoy.
I don’t know. I feel that government is only part of the problem, and big business is the much uglier, much more powerful bad guy. I’m not a huge fan of rules but I think we need to either protect ourselves or have some kind of protector from it. Ideally this would be the government, but more and more the government seems to be acting like police in roaring ’20s Chicago, where mobsters paid them to look the other way. If government is just figureheads for big business and there is no protector, then I’d say no government. I think we could solve this by closing the door between business and the state, just like how we’re not supposed to mix the church and state.
I really think this has a lot more to do with people in office in the legislative branch.
I also don’t believe in outlawing cigarettes or any other type of prohibition really. I enjoy the civil liberties I have and generally don’t like the reduction of them.
I do agree with the end point of what your saying. You’ll have to search hard to find someone more liberal than me.
A few of have been talking about one world government, the fact is we have a local, state and federal government, three levels that run civilization. The formation of a one world government would not negate any of these three that are already established. They would not have power over a nation but over issues that affect the entire planet. Chances are that national governments would still have a defence force, and I mean that literally, not a pleasant name for an offensive force as it is now.
If a one world government were to go about attacking civilians or conquering nations then they would be kept in check by national defence forces and state police forces uniting.
Technically a majority (51%) of mayors have more power than a governor, as a majority of governors has more power than the presidential government. I’m sure that even if 10% of nations combine their forces against an oppressive one world government then it would be too high a price and they would back down on their policy.
No government. We don’t need someone telling us what to do and banning unnecessary things. A system that has everyone in the entire world equal and working together would go so far.
@Chris, We would be fucked if there was a one world government. They would dominate us. They would most likely have an army which would only be used against the people. Power inherently brings corruption. You can’t rule over someone without force.
I am totally against big government, I do no believe there can be an effective world government. Way to many different cultures and beliefs to be governed by one authority. I support small government that protects the borders of the country and its citizens.
If what your saying is true Europe would never be able to get over individual differences that the fought and died for only 150 years ago, now there’s a Union that is slated to become one of the next superpower states in the world.
I think the one thing that will unite us is education. With education we see that the differences between us are far less numerable than the similarities.
Now from a policy standpoint in a world government would likely make laws fit individually for each territory, while requiring member states to follow the over arching priority laws the the body enacts. (Anti-Slavery, Basic Human Rights, Etc. )
Personally I don’t think humans will be able to effectively traverse the stars if we can’t even cooperate on things on our planet. Yes I believe the end game goal of our species should be space travel! Suck it!