By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
richardhutnik on 29 September 2012
Edit Thread
badgenome said:
richardhutnik said:

You miss the point, and get what I have been saying backwards. I was saying the government does things that society values (well values at least seeing less so the government deals with it), that society doesn't do on its own.  If society did it, government wouldn't be involved.  Government doesn't get into things that somewhere the body politic doesn't feel is a problem.   What I see here, whether you sign up to this or not isn't even the point, is a belief that you slash government and then somehow the problems will resolve themselves.  My take  is that the problem doesn't go away simply by slashing government.  Cut welfare and housing people, they will funnel elsewhere.  The way to shrink government is for society to do things outside of government and make the problems go away.  The opposite won't do it.

I don't believe that to be true. As long as there is imperfection anywhere - and life will always be imperfect - someone in government is going to say, "We've gotta do something about this!" It is a primal urge of government agencies to grow, never to shrink. No one in government makes his career by streamlining and downsizing; mission creep is what's incentivized.

And when something is viewed as the government's responsibility, people are less likely to take the initiative to do it on their own. So the idea that government has to just keep on doing things it can't even afford to do until society spontaneously decides to pick up the slack doesn't fly because that simply isn't going to happen.

The government is not some sort of entity that exists in a vaccumn and is a blob that consumes and does it.  The government is a collection of people that pass and enforce laws and attempt to reflect the collective will of the people.  It is a reflection of what the body politic wants.  The issue of the growth of government has to do with laws on the books, and no one bothers to adjust things at all.  There is no primal urge, just more laws getting added and no one bothering to cull down things.  Because people benefit from resources, there isn't an incentive to thin down anywhere.  You can speak about how it systemically works, which is fine, but to make it out as a living, and breathing entity, is absurd.

In regards to what I said, how the heck do you think that problems will get addressed, unless a free society decided to deal with it?  In America, you have much freedom to do things.  You may have to get creative, but there is no one stopping you personally for helping those in need to teach to fish.  There is a constitution that enables the right to assemble also.  And the body politic can vote in things.  So, the reality is this: If the body politic NOW won't go about and attempt to address issues the government is doing, when the heck do you think they will if the government stops doing it?  What percentage of people will end up going to work in soup kitchens if they aren't now, if you got rid of all food stamps, for example?

And you again miss a point here.  It is that the government WILL do things or attempt to do them, if the body politic shows signs it wants it done, and don't act to do it themselves.  Until the body politic does otherwise, it will continue.  The point to deal with IS to get people to see things are their responsibility, before you get changed.  You don't just take away the government programs and expect people who don't see it to be their responsibility to suddenly act?  And certainly act in sufficient and coordinated efforts to act at the same level the government does now.