Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:31 AM
 
768 posts, read 1,087,685 times
Reputation: 343

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
Because we need a certain amount of gov to make sure the laws are enforced. The constitution is upheld and the country is protected.
Or do we perhaps need less laws to enforce?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
Its not the role of gov to provide for us, or tell us how we must live our lives
But it does, doesn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:39 AM
 
125 posts, read 68,147 times
Reputation: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
To those who want small government, why not no government? Why not take your position to its logical conclusion?
Abject stupidity embodied in words."No government" is not the logical conclusion of limited government. I think I smell a Vichy American.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:39 AM
 
Location: South Fla
9,644 posts, read 9,842,040 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
Or do we perhaps need less laws to enforce?
I am sure there is some we could do without but that doesnt change that we are a nation of laws. We elect the people that create the laws. Its a cycle that we control and keep allowing to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
But it does, doesn't it?
Yeah it does. It shouldnt but it does
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:44 AM
 
4,127 posts, read 5,065,593 times
Reputation: 1621
Anarchy might be fun and profitable for some and were I 30 years younger, I'd say go for it.

At heart I'm an anarchist but I also know that we need some sort of government to protect the weak from the strong but when the government gets too strong, who's going to protect us from it?

Even Somalia though it has no real government isn't a true anarchy. It's more a feudal system of various factions rising to fill a power vacuum. While Anarchy may be the epitome of pure freedom, it can only exist in the few seconds it takes for two guys to decide that two hunters (or pirates) are stronger than the sum of each individually.

Last edited by Joe_Ryder; 05-24-2010 at 11:45 AM.. Reason: Typing on a netbook can have unexpected results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:46 AM
 
4,183 posts, read 6,522,118 times
Reputation: 1734
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquamaster View Post
Abject stupidity embodied in words."No government" is not the logical conclusion of limited government. I think I smell a Vichy American.
The arguments used against big federal government can be used against big municipal government. Should your town have a fire department? Why can't individual citizens put out their own fires? Why should I pay taxes in order to put out a fire across town? I take care of my own house. I'm a responsible adult. I don't leave smoldering cigarettes on my carpet. That's why my house will never get burned. Why should I have to pay for the mistakes of those idiots 3 blocks away who smoke in bed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,806,382 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
One where state/local government's handles most of the responsibilities and the federal government handles international and interstate business..
So, you won't be opposed to big government at state and local level. You issue is only at federal level, right (not all governments)? Also, could you elaborate on these responsibilities?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:48 AM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,136,452 times
Reputation: 2908
Small government only works for small countries. If you want a smaller US government, you'll have to divide the country up. The conservative ideal of "less government" will not work for a country of 320 million.

My personal ideal is that there are no countries (anybody hearing Mr. Lennon sing "above us only sky"?). Human beings really need nothing larger than a few thousand at most to form a society. Larger structures cannot help but involve force and abuse of resources. Nothing wrong with a borderless, militaryless, victimless and free planet of Earth-centric people who recognize that their individual societies are their own creation and who simultaneously respect the creations of others. Of course, this allows for some societies to collapse as certain "experiments" in social structures are explored and experienced. For some this kind of "planet of villages" would be too much to bear, but that's the way the free will ball bounces. Our current overarching controlling and slavery-inducing world must fail to achieve its goals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 11:56 AM
 
768 posts, read 1,087,685 times
Reputation: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Ryder View Post
Anarchy might be fun and profitable for some and were I 30 years younger, I'd say go for it.

At heart I'm an anarchist but I also know that we need some sort of government to protect the weak from the strong but when the government gets too strong, who's going to protect us from it?

Even Somalia though it has no real government isn't a true anarchy. It's more a feudal system of various factions rising to fill a power vacuum. While Anarchy may be the epitome of pure freedom, it can only exist in the few seconds it takes for two guys to decide that two hunters (or pirates) are stronger than the sum of each individually.
If there is one thing I've learned from CD posters, it's that they know nothing about anarchism except how to regurgitate the same overused and warn out cliches' against it that if they would take the time to educate themselves on the subject would probably dissolve away in their minds.

I challenge anyone to take up a serious study of the subject and keep an open mind in the process and perhaps they wouldn't be so hostile to the idea. There is plenty of material out there, much of it on line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 12:03 PM
 
4,127 posts, read 5,065,593 times
Reputation: 1621
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Small government only works for small countries. If you want a smaller US government, you'll have to divide the country up. The conservative ideal of "less government" will not work for a country of 320 million.

My personal ideal is that there are no countries (anybody hearing Mr. Lennon sing "above us only sky"?). Human beings really need nothing larger than a few thousand at most to form a society. Larger structures cannot help but involve force and abuse of resources. Nothing wrong with a borderless, militaryless, victimless and free planet of Earth-centric people who recognize that their individual societies are their own creation and who simultaneously respect the creations of others. Of course, this allows for some societies to collapse as certain "experiments" in social structures are explored and experienced. For some this kind of "planet of villages" would be too much to bear, but that's the way the free will ball bounces. Our current overarching controlling and slavery-inducing world must fail to achieve its goals.
Actually we were supposed to be a federation of independent self governing states with very little power allotted to the federal government.

While your ideal sounds wonderful, human nature and 5 million years of clawing our way from tasty snacks to the top of the food chain make it nothing more than a fantasy. When you boil it down, we are opportunistic hunters and since that tendency is what put us where we are, it's pretty much hardwired.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,806,382 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Ryder View Post
Actually we were supposed to be a federation of independent self governing states with very little power allotted to the federal government.
States weren't given more power. They were given sub-ordinate powers, but largely because they were closer to the people. In other words, people stood above state and federal government. After all, a state government can, just as easily, trample upon the rights of the citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:24 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top