| richardhutnik said: And here, I see the usual modern conservative argument against government, and thus to shrink it, is that government doesn't work. The claim is, because government doesn't work, it should be shrunk, so that citizens would then be free to get real solutions that would benefit them. I would say this is a false claim. The issue isn't that government doesn't work, but the reality that it does. It is because it works that people turn to it and use it. Well, what is the context for my saying this? Well, as follows: * Government passes laws that restrict people. Government regulation, with enforcement, can end up driving people out of business. It can also put people in prison. It can also declare wars and execute people. * Government can both have its central bank increase money supply, and tax, and get any money it needs to complete anything that it has agreed to via its government processes. It can end up landing someone on the mood, build infrastructure (like the Internet), and do a number of other things, like employing every person who is without a job, doing anything. Government could, for example, spend money into existence, and accomplish anything it wants. * In keeping with the last point, the government can end up getting people and organization whatever money they want, via subsidies and other handouts. There are entire organizations that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for government spending. Heck, there are entire industries that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for government spending. * Government can fund research also, and if it is possible by the laws of nature, eventually make anything manifest itself in time. So, as seen here, governments do work. They can accomplish anything just about. Maybe they don't do it optimally, and maybe in some cases, there are better options. But the reality is that governments are a fairly sure be to get things done, and safer than other ways actually, because they don't face limitations on resources and use of force that other areas do. If it weren't so, do people think business and other organizations wouldn't be lobbying as much as they do, and throwing money at elections? The reality is that those who are successful at lobbying get what their hearts desire in the end. Government is like a giant genie for them that grants them wishes, their every wish. Now, where should the debate be then, for those who want smaller government. Well, it should be to realize that governments do work, and realize why those who want smaller government have the problems with governments working. They should realize that the body politic loves having the genie of government available to them, and knows that individuals who are lucky enough to get the government to respond, make out real well. This seduction of power people don't want to give up, and when you cry for less government, you then hit the harsh reality of hitting specifics that if you mention, will result in conversation ending with the person you are persuading. End result is that you have to speak in terms about "smaller government" in ways that are vague, because you lose people when you talk specifics. You aren't going to get enough people to go with you, if you start to name WHAT you want the government to do less of. And those who cry for smaller government should realize this that the cries for "freedom" and "liberty" are because government HAS been working in areas that prevent someone from them really doing what they want. It is NOT because government doesn't work, it is because it does work. Sometimes the genie, powered by public opinion, will turn on people and their personal wishes. And real cries of "government doesn't work" is actually a cry for MORE government (done better mine you), not LESS government. |
I am not really understanding what you mean by "government works." You offer as evidence of this the fact that people turn to the government for help as proof that the government is effective. The problem here is that this does not prove that government is effective, it merely proves that people are forced to utilize it. If there is only one company that provides a service then everyone will flock to that company, but it does not necessarily mean that the company is doing a quality job ... they have a monopoly and with that comes stagnation and poor service (no need to innovate when people have to buy from you regardless). The government is by definition a monopoly on the use of force and, thus, will always be inefficient at best and an outright failure at worst.
Think about any nationalized government service whether it be police, healthcare, or the post office and you will see a model of inefficiency precisely because there is no incentive for these organizations to be efficient ... government has made it illegal for competition to exist. Whether your or happy with any government service or not it really doesn't matter to them as you are forced at gun point to subsidize them so your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. Compare this with private sector services like restaurants that are constantly developing new and innovative ways to attract customers by offering new services and products that give them an edge in a competitive market. It is precisely because government is not involved in these industries (that is to say force and violence is not involved in them) that we get so many wonderful innovations like the computers we are using to post in this forum for example or the mostly free Internet we are using (probably won't be free for long as SOPA and other things will come back like they always do).
This is just a taste of what is wrong with government, and I am not even getting into the moral arguments against it such as the obvious fact that government is coercive entity that rules by force, and not by consent (the only people who can claim to have consented to the U.S. are the original framers of the Constitution. The original framers do mention that the government, inthe case of the U.S. that is, was meant to benefit their posterity, but that can no way be seen as consent for anyone aside from those original framers.
I could go on, but I think that covers the basics. Government does not "work" and it never has if we define "work" as being a positive and beneficial force in human history. It is just another relic from humanities violent past much like slavery, and the world will be much better off when it is finally done away with.
