| richardhutnik said: 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. |
Yes, of course the government is not an actual organism. It's called an analogy, but I forgot how frustratingly literal you can be. The point is, there is no incentive for government to ever become more efficient or to do less, but to do more, more, more, even if it does it poorly. Which I see you agree with. "Because people benefit from resources, there isn't an incentive to thin down anywhere." That was... a very Romney like thing for you to say.
I'm not sure if you're actually familiar with how our system of government works. The citizenry does not vote for "things". They vote for people. These people may do things that the people who voted for them completely disagree with, but the nature of republican politics is that voters - especially superficial and uninformed voters - are swayed more by personality than by logic and issues. Perception trumps reality, in other words. We tend to vote for people whom we like and especially those whom we see as being "like us". An example. Poll after poll shows that more people agree with Romney's positions on the issues, but they are simply not buying into him as a person because he's a stiff and a terrible politician. This is how we end up with a lot of laws with which people may vehemently disagree. It's their own fault, to be sure, for not prioritizing principles over principals, but it's still why your rose-colored view of "government as the only thing we all belong to" (as the Democrats like to say) is so naive and wrong.
I personally believe (and no, I don't know what Paul Ryan thinks about this, quit trying to tie me to Romney/Ryan, damn it) that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen. The same part of the human psychological make up that turns a coddled child into an languid, ambitionless creature turns a society under an overbearing government into a very inert one, both socially and economically. I don't think it's a coincidence that churches and fraternal orders are in sharp decline as government continues to grow and grow. Yes, technically you are still free to help people. Well, sometimes. But if something is seen as "that thing the goverment does" (read: something that someone else is supposed to do), then one tends to feel that by simply paying his taxes he is doing his fair share.
