 sj |
||
|
||
Government---the bigger the better !!!!
|
|
|
Subject: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Art Thieme Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:28 PM In these days of 'shrink the government', I take the opposite point of view. BIGGER IS BETTER from where I stand. Over the years great things have come from big government.
The New Deal And so many more great programs to help the people of the U.S.A. in the constant fight that seemingly must be waged against the abuse of corporate power. These have NOT cost too much. No, these fine programs would've been inexpensive at three times the cost. And they have allowed so many good people to find alternative ways to make their ways through this world without joining the ranks of the Capitalists whose main job seems to be monetary growth just for growth's sake. To me, that is and always will be the ideology of a cancer cell. Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Mrrzy Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:36 PM Not to mention that if everybody worked for the goverment we'd have achieved global unity! I am with you, Art. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:38 PM If everyone were lobotomized we would achieve global unity. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:39 PM Oh boy....I can hardly wait to see what this one brings! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Mrrzy Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:45 PM Earl, that's not unity, sorry! |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Whistle Stop Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:45 PM Art has a valid point (and not just because I work for the government). The whole "shrinking government" movement is one of those things that people tend to support without examining it too closely -- it makes for good bumper-sticker politics, basically. Unrestrained growth of anything is bad, but I'm glad that a lot of what my government does isn't left to the private sector. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:51 PM I don't think you guys have much to worry about. The Republican congress just passed the biggest spending bill in the history of mankind and it was signed by the president who said "the era of big government is over." If you want fiscal responsibility you have to vote for the Drunken Sailor Party. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 23 Oct 00 - 12:53 PM IMHO, the government should do those things that are in the collective best interest of the nation, and which cannot be done or should not be done (due to conflict of interest, disparity of outcome based on wealth, etc.) by the private sector. Paving roads comes to mind, funding schools, that sort of thing. All of the programs Art mentioned are arguably fall into this category. Whenever someone gets on their "government is bad, taxes are bad" kick, I point out that taxes pay for the roads they drive their gas-guzzling SUV's on, and the fire fighters who will put out the flames should their mansion catch on fire, and the police who will arrest the assailants who try to rob them, etc. etc. etc. And DON'T get me started about the a**holes who refuse to pay any federal income tax and make self-righteous noise about the constitution. It's not about the constitution, it's about the social contract. Them what live in society, and partake in the benefits of society, must pay for society. Period. Just my US$0.02.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: harpgirl Date: 23 Oct 00 - 03:04 PM Well put Art. I also agree. Many of us want all those goodies, but, too many dont want to pay for them. You hate taxes? thats the price we pay for the great society we live in. You dont approve? move to Bosnia. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: katlaughing Date: 23 Oct 00 - 03:04 PM I totally agree with you Art. We were just discussing what it might be like if we get an all Republican Congress and President. A Progressive Democratic Senator from VT, who was on NPR, says we will see a swing farther to the right than we've ever seen in the history of our country and I am inclined to agree with him. MT, out here in Wyoming we have a lot of those so-called "constitutionalists" and the grumblers about paying taxes. I always tell them just about the same thing you do. kat |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Kim C Date: 23 Oct 00 - 04:18 PM Well, you know, the Good Book tells us to render unto Caesar, and I don't have a problem with that. I know we have to have taxes to pay for the things we enjoy. But I also think so much of that money is wasted and we never get a full accounting of it. And a lot of times, before the Fed will give any project money to states, they say, we'll give you this money but only if you do so and so or pass such and such law in your state. Personally I think that is a blatant violation of state sovereignty. But what do I know, I'm just an unfrozen caveman... |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 23 Oct 00 - 04:30 PM State sovereignty has been dead since the end of the Civil War.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 23 Oct 00 - 04:54 PM Mousethief: Uh, tell me about this social contract, please. I was not aware that we had a social contract with society. Who wrote it? Who signed it? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 23 Oct 00 - 04:58 PM DougR: you did, by not leaving society when you were old enough to make that choice. This is all in Rousseau and Locke. Our constitution is based on it. Time to complete your education.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 23 Oct 00 - 05:25 PM I don't care what them pompous, wig-wearin, Eurotrash philosophers said. I never sign a contract without reading the fine print. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 23 Oct 00 - 05:28 PM spoken like a true conservative, Earl.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 23 Oct 00 - 05:31 PM Conservatives are mean. I'm a libertarian. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Jim the Bart Date: 23 Oct 00 - 05:47 PM I like libertarians. I figure we should send them all to their own little planets to let them find out what "making their own way in the world" is really all about. Problem these days is that everybody's had the safety net there for so long that they don't even see it anymore. As for Art's original post - Hear! Here! Bart |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 23 Oct 00 - 06:05 PM That should reinvigorate the space program. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Midchuck Date: 23 Oct 00 - 06:16 PM I bethink me that libertarians have gotten to be almost as doctrinaire (how the f*** do you spell that, anyways?) as liberals or conservatives. I like Heinlein's term: "Rational Anarchist." Now we'll have a moment of silence so everyone can yell "Oxymoron!" in chorus. O. K. Everybody done? An Anarchist believes that all government is evil. A Rational Anarchist believes that some government is a necessary evil. The issue is, how little we can have and still make society work. I don't know exactly how much that is. But since all the liberals and all the conservatives obviously do know, I probably don't need to. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Bill D Date: 23 Oct 00 - 08:07 PM People get the government they deserve..... That is, the people collectively get the government they deserve collectively. Individually, it just don't work out. In some ways, the Republicans are the greatest pragmitists...if THEY win, they immediately do things that specifically benefit themselves, and the class/economic gap in society grows ever wider. The only real difference between older style conservatives and todays, is that now they also do a good job of lying to themselves about the real consequences of their actions. They complain about "big government" because the bigger the government, the harder it is to control.....why, if it gets TOO big, it might even have room for some real programs to DO things for people, like Art and mousethief said. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 23 Oct 00 - 08:43 PM Yep, Bill D, everybody knows in a republic like ours, government is supposed to take care of everybody! I guess to be fair that applies to the rich too. Mousethief you explanation of the contract we have with society causes me to wonder. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Carlin Date: 23 Oct 00 - 10:24 PM You left a few things off your list Art...
Segregation...was this not the essence of 'Big Government'?
McCarthyism...the government decided what political parties you could belong to, who could write for the movies, who gov. employees could associate with.
And a personal favorite of mine...the Hayes office. I think I like it so much because it was a public-private partnership. The goverment cowed Hollywood into industrial censorship. By threatening to bring the full weight of government power to bear on them, the gov. actually forced the movie business to set up its own little Film Czar..... |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Rick Fielding Date: 23 Oct 00 - 10:47 PM I used to be a Socialist til I realized that with my uncooperative attitudes to authority, I'd be one of the first people jailed or shot.(or worse..put to work in the fields!) I think I'm a "benevolent anarchist" these days. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 23 Oct 00 - 10:50 PM I think it would be interesting for someone to post, in their opinion, what government can do better than private industry can. There are obviously some social progams that private industry would have no reason to be involved in because the purpose for privatization is to show a profit. But other than those programs, what can government do better, and particularly more effeciently, than private industry? DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 23 Oct 00 - 11:19 PM Jeeze, Rick! I'm glad you "Saw the Light!" You're a good man! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Jim the Bart Date: 23 Oct 00 - 11:34 PM Earl - I'm glad you have a sense of humor. I was going to comment again, but I'm too tired to make a point and all I'd end up doing is pissing in the wind. So I'm going to wish you all a good night. Goodnight Bart |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: JamesJim Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:53 AM Art, you would have liked the system in the Soviet Union. Wonder why it, as well as the country, collapsed? Could it be because everyone had their hand out? No creativity? No innovation? Thank God for the balance here -- conservatives and liberals seem to create a balance (I can't help but remember the old saying: "Making law is like making sausage. Neither are very pretty to watch being made)." I spent my career in managing employee benefits and have studied government programs. It's true that many good benefits have come out of political ideas. However, there is so much waste in Medicare (as an example), you wouldn't believe it. I firmly believe that a major reason medical costs are so out of control is that government got into the business of providing healthcare. It was a great idea, but has been so fraught with fraud and mismanagement that we have paid substantially more for our care than necessary. The providers have seen it as a free lunch, especially when they can bill for services never rendered and no one audits them. Thankfully things have improved somewhat, but we are headed for many more problems. No, my friend....the SMALLER the government, the better. It would be wonderful if politicians would quit promising the moon to everyone, just to get their vote. So many don't realize that it's there money that's being wasted. From the looks of it however, I doubt that will happen in our lifetime. If you like big government, you should continue to be happy with the way things are going, no matter who is elected. Peace! Jim |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Whistle Stop Date: 24 Oct 00 - 08:43 AM Doug, I think that government (federal, state, or local) can do a better job of anything where services need to be provided at a comparable level to people regardless of their economic status. That includes police services, firefighting, military, education, welfare (in all its forms), environmental protection, and a whole host of other areas. I know it is currently a hot issue, but I also believe that this applies to medical care, and that the medical system in the USA will keep getting more problematic until we all come to terms with this reality. I have spent most (but not all) of my adult life in government. In my eight years with the United States Coast Guard I have saved lives, ensured the safety of navigation and shipping, cleaned up the environment, evaluated and guarded against terrorist threats, and served as a deterrent to the military forces of other countries (I am fortunate enough to have never been required to serve in wartime; I have enormous respect for the dedication and sacrifices of those who have done so). None of these things would have been done as well, or with as much regard for the rights and safety of ALL citizens (irrespective of their economic status), had we been forced to rely on the private sector. As you have acknowledged, the essence of the private sector is the profit motive. Had the private sector been responsible for these functions, the wealthy would have been saved and protected, while the poor would have been left to fend for themselves. In my career since leaving the USCG, I have worked in the environmental protection and cleanup field, in both the public and private sectors. While there are well-meaning individuals in both, the essential underlying motivation is what makes the difference. A corporation MUST put profits first, or it will lose out to the competition. Therefore ALL companies and corporations that I have represented as a private sector consultant (a very large number, from small businesses to multinational corporations) required my services primarily to see how little they could get away with in fulfilling their legal obligations to clean up the environment. I don't blame them for this, but I recognize that it is so. And the more successful I was in meeting their needs, the more the environment was put at risk. The victims of my successes include every individual in the affected area who breathes the air, drinks the water, and otherwise partakes of the resources that are supposed to be here for all of us. Our democracy, of course, functions increasingly as a public/private partnership. That is as it should be; both are necessary, and need to be kept in balance to ensure that we have a viable AND responsible economic system. I am all for efficiency, but in my experience the private sector is no more efficient in its use of resources than the public sector. The private sector keeps getting bigger; shouldn't the public sector as well? |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: rabbitrunning Date: 24 Oct 00 - 08:58 AM Governments do free public libraries better than private corporations do, for one. I think that government is a necessary check, sometimes, on the "profit is everything" motive. Having the people regulated write the regulations (as G.W.Bush did in Texas) is irresponsible. Modern corporations recognize only their responsibility to the stockholders. The other "stakeholders" (employees and the community) are usually only given consideration because of government regulation or incentives. I was watching a show on FDR the other night, and it seems to me that the modern Republican party is doing it's level best to reverse the entire New Deal. The stock market instead of Social Security? That's what worked so well in the nineteen twenties, isn't it? Before the New Deal, government didn't provide any kind of safety nets. It was all private charity and people starved. Government needs to be large enough to cope with the size of the population it governs. It needs to be large enough to provide services to the people who need services. I wouldn't mind seeing more accountable government -- who spent what where -- but downsizing government leaves necessary programs underfunded or staffed by overworked burnout cases. Ahh... gotta get off my soapbox and go to work... |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Art Thieme Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:26 PM This is exactly the discussion I had hoped to provoke pretty much. Many well taken points are here. I would not, as someone has indicated, be happier in the old Soviet Union. As I've said before, the Soviet people were rebelling against totalitarianism more than Socialism. But they tossed the baby out with the filthy washwater. My question is this: Is it possible to have a benevolent and caring system within a Democracy? I think it is---or ought to be. It's something to shoot for anyhow. But the majority (in a Democracy) can be pretty tyranical given the right circumstances. Art Thieme
|
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Frankham Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:32 PM Art, not only that but if we hadn't had government support for American folk music through the Library of Congress and the Lomaxes, the folk music revival might not have happened. It was government grants that enabled many folklorists to do their work. Woody Guthrie's first big gig was the Grand Coulee Dam Project financed by the TVA and through the Lomaxes, Alan in particular. I think our taxes were put to good use. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:34 PM One thing government does better than the private sector: hold the toes of business to the fire to force them to treat their employees equitably, to protect both employee and public safety, and to not damage the environment. Among other things. As you say, Doug, the purpose of business is greed, and greed doesn't take equity or cleanliness into account; those things cost money. Without a progressive government forcing business to do these things, we would be (indeed, were, in the past) much worse off. The frightening thing is, the press has all but given up its role as watchdog over industry, being after all a part of industry itself, and owned by huge, polluting conglomerates with no motive but greed. Who will protect us from the Rollerball future we seem to be heading toward? Either government, or nobody.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Frankham Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:41 PM No Carlin, segregation was ultimately about "states rights". As I see it, Lincoln, the Kennedys and Johnson were thrown reluctantly into having to deal with segregation. Wilson was egregious in employing it but the government eventually "righted itself" in this regard as they will ultimately do with the gay issue. McCarthy was a product of hysteria and was supported by a conservative regime under Ike but this was "righted" as more enlightened people took their place in government because the American public had sense enough to vote better people in office. Ultimately, we are the government. They represent us and if we vote for them, they are us. Republicans remind us that this is not a pure democracy, but a republic. Still, we need to remind them that they can't buy the election by corporate welfare and lobbies. The people still count. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:45 PM Oh I dunno Art.........I'm really getting into Carlin's ideas on all this in both of the threads. Big government has taken over as he says and his desire to eradicate it is admirable. His points above all show how big government has taken over our lives in many aspects, so I would assume that a major downsizing and getting them out of our lives would be a good idea. If we take control back and downsize the feds, then they won't be able to make those decisions which get us into so much trouble worldwide so we should be able to reduce the size of the military by at least 75%. Let's take back total control of our own selves and by doing so we can forget the whole drug thing and all the money that's spent on stopping drug traffic. Big government cannot tell me what I should or should not partake of! And getting them out of our lives should do away with any further discussion on abortion and all the Roe v. Wade stuff entirely. It is entirely the woman's choice than. Yeah Carlin....I'm with you! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Whistle Stop Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:56 PM Art, I think that it is possible to have a benevolent and caring system within a democracy -- as long as we're willing to recognize that "democracy" means more than "majority rule". For all its failings, the US Constitution is predicated on striking an appropriate balance between serving the desires of the majority and defending the rights of the minority. The government needs a certain amount of muscle to do this effectively, and needs to be willing to stand up to a misguided majority on occasion. The misguided majority may be motivated by racism, or religious intolerance, or the profit motive -- whatever the motivation, the government has to be enough of a presence that it can have some hope of ensuring fair and equal treatment for all. That concept is abstract and simplistic, but the application of it to specific issues is often quite complex. Therefore, I think that it is probably impossible for an effective and benevolent democracy to run on auto-pilot -- it needs tending by good people who will move beyond simple slogans to deal with real-world problems in all their complexity. My preference is for a government run by intelligent people, who can articulate goals and principles in a straightforward manner, but can deal with the complexity of the real world as well -- people who can handle both the "macro" and the "micro". My objection to so many of the "small government" crowd is that they seem to feel the slogans are enough, and paint anyone who understands the details as a "pointy-headed bureaucrat" who advocates waste and inefficiency. "They trust the government; we trust the people" is one recent example that comes to mind. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 24 Oct 00 - 12:59 PM Excellent discussion. Wish I had nothing else to do, i'd like to present counter arguments for some of the points made, but all in all, I agree with Art that it is a good discussion. Just one thing, though, Mousethief if you are going to quote me, quote me correctly. I did not use the word, "greed" in my post. I used the word, "profit." Those two words are in now way synonymous. If businesses are not profitable, they cannot stay in business. People are employed by businesses. If businesses cease to exist, jobs cease to exist. If jobs cease to exist, the country has a huge unemployement problem. The businesses that cease to exist and pay taxes and the people who worked for those failed businesses that also paid taxes, no longer pay taxes and cannot support government. Is that so difficult to accept? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Grab Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:01 PM DougR, just by having a crap in a toilet, you've participated in society. Reason - society needs to pay for adequate water supplies to an area, repair of drains, sewage processing, all the rest. So opt out of society and tell them you're not going to take their shit any more... Grab. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:07 PM Hey, DougR, calm down! I never said businesses were evil, or unnecessary. I work for Boeing, one of the biggest businesses in the business (so to speak), and hope it continues to be profitable for a long time. Nevertheless, without government controls, businesses would have little or no incentive to protect the environment or employ equitably and safely, because these things COST rather than EARN money. Why is THAT so hard to accept? The desire for profit is the desire for money, for profit means "the money left over after you pay all the expenses." People don't start or invest in businesses because they hate money. I guess it depends on how you define "greed." I can agree to disagree on this one.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:24 PM Grab: that's funny. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Bill D Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:34 PM Private industry 'could' do many things that big government does not do very well...but they often do NOT! You simply can't depend on altruism to go any farther than the bottom line..profit. Whether it is a 'reasonable' profit or an outrageos, greedy profit is often hard to tell, as they don't usually have to open the books and make the details known.........The thing is, the competition that made America great is rapidly dwindling as mergers & buy-outs make us ever more dependant on the whims of suits & ties in board rooms. I used to have 3 or 4 small drug stores within 5 minutes drive...one was bought and summarily closed by Safeway, so that THEIR pharmacy had no competition across the street, and most other small pharmacies in our area are being flat driven out of business and bought by CVS corporation.....who simply makes little attempt to carry the same lines and give the same personalized service. They sell ONLY what they consider good for CVS and are working to be sure the coming generation has few choices beyond what CVS determines they need. Government COULD restrain this process, but it takes so much money to BECOME part of the lesgative body anymore that lawmakers are usually drawn FROM the private industry they need to regulate. I am not enamored of government for its own sake, I just have more interest in Utilitarianism, rather than Pragmatism, being the guiding principle. In theory, a benevolent despot would provide the most efficient government, but they seem to be in pretty short supply these days....(anyone want to give ME the job? *heh-heh*) |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Skeptic Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:45 PM IMO, in part, we have big government (in the sense of scope, not just numbers) because the social controls that worked well in smaller communities, tend not to work as well for urban, mobile societies. The controls are needed and government stepped up to the plate. And in the nature of all large organizations, government moved to solidify its power. The problem with taking back control of our lives from the government is that, at least in our Republic, the majority don't want to. (By majority I mean those who vote). If the People don't want big government, they can stop it by demanding accountability from the people they elect. And not re-electing them if they don't step up to the plate. But its so much easier to let some organ of governmental do it to you, rather than take personal responsibility. Letting the government take responsibility also lets the individual off the hook for the consequences. I think Whistlestop understated the inefficiency of big business. Having lived in that world for 12 years, and since moved to work for a local government, what I notice is that government is more concerned with looking at the effective use of its resources before they jump into something. I've seen a private company put $12 million into a project that failed, and write the whole thing off as "opportunity cost". Imagine your local government paving a couple of miles of road and then deciding not to use it because it turned out the public didn't need a road there to begin with? Regards John |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Carlin Date: 24 Oct 00 - 01:51 PM "Oh I dunno Art.........I'm really getting into Carlin's ideas on all this in both of the threads. Big government has taken over as he says and his desire to eradicate it is admirable."
That's great spaw.....I'll have you believing in freedom soon.
"If we take control back and downsize the feds, then they won't be able to make those decisions which get us into so much trouble worldwide so we should be able to reduce the size of the military by at least 75%."
Works for me. Bring the troops back home. No more peacekeeping, no more nation building, no more Euro-troubles, and no more human landmines in Korea.
Of course as Al Gore so proudly pointed out during the debates he wants to spend twice as much money on the military as Bush. He has also ridiculed Bush for his proposed draw down in Europe. Perhaps you should consider voting Republican.
"Let's take back total control of our own selves and by doing so we can forget the whole drug thing and all the money that's spent on stopping drug traffic. Big government cannot tell me what I should or should not partake of!"
Works for me. Legalize it, tax it. I will not use my tax money to support anyone's drug habit. If you want to get high do it on your own dime.
Now if we had socialized medicine the government would be able to tell you where when and how to get high. If they are picking up the tab for your health care, then they certainly have an obligation to regulate behavior that could be detrimental to your health.
"all the Roe v. Wade stuff entirely. It is entirely the woman's choice than."
Works for me.
|
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 24 Oct 00 - 02:38 PM Yep....proves my contention that the "Political Spectrum" is not linear but circular and there's a part where both sides almost meet. So tell me Carlin..........Do you see it happening? Will either candidate (that has a chance to win) make a difference on a grand scale? Yeah......I don't think so either, so we're left with trying to elect the one who might affect one or two issues in some small way. The people will fancy an appearance of Freedom; Illusion will be their native land......Jacques Elull Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Jim Krause Date: 24 Oct 00 - 02:42 PM Art, Art, Art, Thank God somebody has the sense God gave geese! I have been saying these same words, or words very much like them for a long time. Sometimes bigger is better. AMEN |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: DougR Date: 24 Oct 00 - 04:21 PM And you feel rather strongly about it too, eh Soddy? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Kim C Date: 24 Oct 00 - 04:45 PM If state sovereignty is dead it's only because people have become so complacent they have no idea that the Constitution is based on it. Plus the federal government has made it difficult for states to manage their own affairs, for the reasons I previously stated (ie, money, money, and money). But you will notice, that liquor laws, gun laws, speed limits, etc. etc. do vary from state to state and are not regulated by federal mandates, they're regulated by the Citizens of That State. My understanding of the Constitution was that all the Fed was supposed to do was coin money and raise an army. But like I said, I'm just an unfrozen caveman and probably have no idea what I'm talking about. :) |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: mousethief Date: 24 Oct 00 - 05:24 PM Actually, no, state sovereignty is dead because of a series of court rulings dating from the time of the civil war. At that time the USA ceased to be a federation of independent states and became a single nation. Yes, states still have some autonomy for setting things like liquor laws and speed limits (although the national 55mph speed limit showed exactly how far that could go!), but federalism is dead. If you grew up when I did, you knew from Saturday morning cartoons that the purpose of the Constitution was to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. At least that's what the Constitution says. The 10th amendment gave all rights not mentioned in the constitution back to the states. But it has been ridden roughshod over repeatedly in the last 200+ years. Federal drug laws, for example, have absolutely no constitutional standing, yet they have never been slapped down by the courts. The people who wanted to make booze illegal realized that the constitution didn't allow a federal law (let alone a presidential mandate!) doing so, and amended the constitution. But when DuPont wanted hemp made illegal, somehow this was forgotten, and we have a slew of federal anti-drug laws (and mandates) which are wholly unconstitutional, at least if the 10th amendment is still part of the constitution. Alas, it would seem it is is not! It's not that you're an unfrozen caveman, Kim, it's just that you're mistaking the Constitution in-and-of-itself with the Constitution as it has been defined (some would say re-defined) down through the ages by the Supreme Court.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: RWilhelm Date: 24 Oct 00 - 05:24 PM One problem with these discussions is we are always comparing the private sector to some ideal theory of government. That is not the same as comparing it to the government in the real world. With corporations at least we know that the motivation is to make a profit or at least enough money to keep the wheels rolling. In politics can anyone really say what drives men like Clinton, the Bushes, or Gore? And they are just the top of the heap. We have to hope that cumulative effect of hundreds of these petty, insecure, self-righteous, psyches in congress will lead us forward. We can't guarantee it will get better but it will get bigger. |
|
Subject: RE: Government---the bigger the better !!!! From: Kim C Date: 24 Oct 00 - 05:50 PM Yes, thank you, I learned the Preamble from Schoolhouse Rock; but I still believe that the United States is a union of 50 free and independent states. The Tennessee Constitution uses those exact words: "free and independent state." To me that means that the citizens of Tennessee can govern the state of Tennessee in any way they see fit. I think in the last few years, the Colorado anti-gay legislation, the California legal pot legislation, and the arguments against the Brady Bill have ALL been about state sovereignty. So maybe it's dead in practice, only because the Fed has killed it, but it lives on in the hearts of individual citizens. :) |
| Share Thread: |