Why do we need a government?

[dd74]

I've been reading Fastpat and Superman's discussions regarding our government's importance in our lives. It seems Fastpat believes government is a tool at best, that in its current state, is abusing its power over the American people. Supes believe government has an overall purpose in our lives; although the leadership, at the moment, is less than stellar.

I hope I have both positions of both men correct.

Regardless, the question still stands: Why do we need a government? Why can't we split up into little principalities? With that, we would build our own roads, educate our own children. You know, all that "it takes a village" sort of stuff self-reliance without a faceless overseer demanding of us taxes and support for scenarios (Iraq) which increasingly seems distant from many Americans' points of view of what is important.

So, do we need the/a government?

[legion]

Why do we need a government?

To protect the rest of you from me.

[Moses]

Originally posted by dd74


So, do we need the/a government?

Yes. With about 50% of the current budget and "agenda".

[dd74]

Originally posted by legion
Why do we need a government?

To protect the rest of you from me.

You sound like you need your own island, or planet, or something...

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by Moses
Yes. With about 50% of the current budget and "agenda".

And a two term limit on ALL elected officials. After seeing some of these old farts who have made this their life's mission to not have a job, this is one thing that needs to change and now.

End the pork barrel projects and no attachments to any bill. Discuss one thing at a time and vote on it within one week, then move on to the next issue of business.

No leaving DC until every bill is addressed and the people vote on pay raises for their representatives, not doing it themselves as they have done for eons. Also, they use the same retirement plan that we do, not some specialized one set up by themselves.

[gaijindabe]

The government you get in Berkley, CA is not what you get in Waco, TX - and that is a good thing.

People vote with their feet all the time. Look at up-state New York - the economy has been crushed with regulations, taxes and welfare spending - whole companies pack up and move to North Carolina.

But how does that help those that can't leave? I don't know.

[legion]

Originally posted by dd74
You sound like you need your own island, or planet, or something...

I wouldn't mind an island.

Let me know when you find me one.

Seriously, the only purpose of government is to protect the physically weak from the physically strong. Most of our politicians fall into the physically weak category.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Joeaksa
And a two term limit on ALL elected officials. After seeing some of these old farts who have made this their life's mission to not have a job, this is one thing that needs to change and now.

End the pork barrel projects and no attachments to any bill. Discuss one thing at a time and vote on it within one week, then move on to the next issue of business.

No leaving DC until every bill is addressed and the people vote on pay raises for their representatives, not doing it themselves as they have done for eons. Also, they use the same retirement plan that we do, not some specialized one set up by themselves.

All good thoughts. And long overdue.

[Moneyguy1]

Basic reasons for government include providing those services that the individual is unable or unwilling to provide for itself; security in the form of some kind of defense system, protection for all members against abuse by others (law enforcement), and the like. This applies to all levels of government, within reason.

Unfortunately, government has morphed into a "big brother" (big bother?) who makes decisions for all of us, and for the most part, we accept this as the good little automotons we have been trained as.

Little by little, individual freedoms are disappearing (in the name of national security) and we seem willing to simply let this happen, thinking these changes make us "safer".

Funding provided by the federal government for local projects is used sometimes as a weapon, ensuring that the locals follow the desires of Washington. Elected officials are answerable to the public inversely to the distance from the public (locals catch the most hell and are the most accountable, Congress and the President the least accountable).

The system becomes more Machivillian and no one seems to notice.

[1967 R50/2]

We need a govt because:

Individuals can't be trusted to be moral, decent humans and look out for the common good. Moses knew it. Jesus knew it. Buddah knew it, Adam Smith knew it, Nietsche knew it...and you know it too.

In synopsis, see Legion's comment and take it seriously. Remember, not so long ago in human history, might made right. Still true in most of the world.

[gaijindabe]

Originally posted by Moneyguy1


Little by little, individual freedoms are disappearing (in the name of national security) and we seem willing to simply let this happen, thinking these changes make us "safer".

The freedom not to have a killer property tax bill is a sort of freedom that is slipping away for millions.

[Moneyguy1]

Local jurisdictions should not profit from increases in real estate value not caused by inflation or property improvements. In other words, speculation should not provide a property tax windfall.

[BGCarrera32]

Government has become large and bloated because people depend on it to solve all of their problems. An example would be the cry to put the government in charge of the health care system, because they do such a *fantastic* job with the DMV.

Term limits are not needed for those in congress; you have the power to vote them out.

Ever notice how individuals are elected to Congress and exit multi-millionaires when they were not when appointed? You and I may, but the general populous does not, indicating to me how disengaged the average citizen really is.

Security and Freedom are opposites.

[masraum]

Originally posted by dd74
Why can't we split up into little principalities? With that, we would build our own roads, educate our own children.

So in other words there would be great roads along the west coast, the north east, and the south east, and no way to get from the east coast to the west coast because the states in the middle would have dirt tracks for roads.

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by BGCarrera32
Ever notice how individuals are elected to Congress and exit multi-millionaires when they were not when appointed? You and I may, but the general populous does not, indicating to me how disengaged the average citizen really is.

Security and Freedom are opposites.

Exactly why we need to put the term limits in! You get elected and spend two terms helping your country and govt then go back to the public sector. End of the govt gravy train for you!

[Moneyguy1]

Defeated and retired politicians become high paid "consultants" to the companies and organizations they "favored" while in office.

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by BGCarrera32
Term limits are not needed for those in congress; you have the power to vote them out.

Disagree. State legislatures routinely redraw districts to gerrymander themselves and the national Congressmen so that the incumbent can select their voting population and maintain his/her seat indefinitely (or until the majority changes which could be decades).

I have always been in favor of 2 term limits for all elected officials. If that were to occur you might actually see some average Americans in office which is really what our founding fathers intended.

[Superman]

Originally posted by Joeaksa
And a two term limit on ALL elected officials. After seeing some of these old farts who have made this their life's mission to not have a job, this is one thing that needs to change and now.

End the pork barrel projects and no attachments to any bill. Discuss one thing at a time and vote on it within one week, then move on to the next issue of business.

No leaving DC until every bill is addressed and the people vote on pay raises for their representatives, not doing it themselves as they have done for eons. Also, they use the same retirement plan that we do, not some specialized one set up by themselves.

Joe said this and inexplicably, the wise and venerable Moses agreed. I will continue reading after taking this opportunity to state my opposition to any and all provisions which seek to overcome or mollify the problems created by apathy and ignorance. These, and any other similar suggestions, will not form a reasonable substitute for people, citizens, voters...becoming informed and involved. Term limits, pork barrel, etc., would not be a problem if America was watching. The kids in DC are mostly unsupervised, and that is the problem. Mommy and Daddy are sleeping. Things will change when they wake up.

[dd74]

Originally posted by Superman
JMommy and Daddy are sleeping. Things will change when they wake up.

There isn't any doubt who Mommy and Daddy are. The problem is both lack the discipline to alter the behavior pattern of "the kids" in DC.

We've said FOREVER that we want change, but that so far has not happened. Voting isn't enough because not enough vote. So what will it take? Fastpat believes revolution, or complete refusal to acknowledge a U.S. government. Well, I'm not going to say he's wrong or right, but something drastic has to happened. The system, as is, is entrenched to the point of petrified wood.

It seems, really, that Mommy and Daddy aren't just asleep. They're on life support.

[Superman]

Okay, I finished reading. More votes for term limits. Hmmm.... I wonder what we'd do if we found a real leader. Boot him out after two terms?

Yes dd, I think you fairly stated the two opposing camps.

There is no question that our government is misbehaving. Massively misbehaving. Tragically, unconscionably misbehaving. Bagdad does not have the market cornered on Evil. We have that right here. But to suggest that government is unnecessary is not even sensible enough to be "laughable."

Imagine a country with no government. Can't, can you? That's because "government" is what defines a country. Without it, it's just an area of land ripe for formation into a country or countries.

Now let's imagine a country with almost no government, but with "national" defense. What "national" values and principles would that "nation" defend, other than the desire to be left alone? It would be a nation formed under the principle of non-integration. And would that be a powerful force when it comes time to defend? I mean, again, the military would not be part of a government, it would be the whole thing. And it would have the job of protecting "citizen's" (if you can call them that) rights to have no other government. I'm not sure that military would be terribly motivated to be effective. If the rest of the world thought a nation such as this would survive and be stable, it might immigrate by the millions. Maybe. And there would be no immigration policy or enforcement.

In fact, there would be no enforcement of land rights. Citizens protected under this military would have to be heavily armed to further protect themselves from fellow citizens.

Let's go at this another way: If a community were cut loose.......if a community were disowned by federal, state and local government, what would happen? Easy. The people in that community with leadership tendencies would get together and talk. "What do we do now?" they would say. They would agree that a sewer system is favorable, and that roads would benefit everyone also. And schools. And they would throw some money together because these things are 1) in everybody's interest and 2) worth more than their costs in terms of health and economic prosperity.

Government is simply our way of getting ***** done. Investing in ourselves. Pooling our resources to build the infrastructure we need. We can work in competition or in cooperation. I prefer the latter. Pat imagines the former. I may get my wish. Pat will never get his wish.