An interesting thought on democracy

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Really? I see America at the stage of complacency/apathy, and western europe in the stage of dependancy.

Complacency requires that there is no desire to improve, and that might be true. Apathy means that the population doesn't care that things are getting worse. I don't think that any Western country is at that stage, yet. Maybe in another generation, or two. We are all pretty shortsighted in our political thinking.

IMO, my country is farther along the track than yours, though we are technically younger.

[Steelrat]

If we down size the government we will accomplish both of your points Steel.

By reducing the government we will effectivly lower taxes becuase less government employees means less salary.

Also, by reducing the government we reduce the useless handout programs that go no where in getting people off their keisters and on their feet.

As my sig said before it was destroyed: "FREE MARKET IS BEST! REMOVE GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL AND THINGS WILL RUN BETTER

The list of areas where government regulatory control has been removed and marked improvement has then occured is legion.

Free market is NOT best. There has to be some government oversight of labor laws and environmental concerns. If left to their own devices, most companies will sacrifice anything to improve their profit, which is not always a good thing.

Most of the money this country spends goes to the entitlement programs. Everyone can squabble about pork-barrel, government regulation, and such, but if you really want to impact the budget, you need to deal with medicare and social security, and most politicians are too worried about their careers to touch them. Even worse, everyone wants to cut taxes, even though the current tax rates do not cover government expenditures. Its total insanity.

[xXHavokXx]

Forget about democracy submit to my coming rule.

[MrWallen]

If we down size the government we will accomplish both of your points Steel.

By reducing the government we will effectivly lower taxes becuase less government employees means less salary.

Also, by reducing the government we reduce the useless handout programs that go no where in getting people off their keisters and on their feet.

As my sig said before it was destroyed: "FREE MARKET IS BEST! REMOVE GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL AND THINGS WILL RUN BETTER

The list of areas where government regulatory control has been removed and marked improvement has then occured is legion.

Also, free market would lead to monopolies so fast it wouldn't be funny. Government needs to be present to both stop monopolies and make sure competition stays stimulated.

[maxama10]

Well its sad that its getting to the point where gays lesbian transgenders etc... are almost excepted. i mean i have nothing against them but to me thats just plain wrong and morally incorect. doesnt have much to do with this topic but yeah........

[personman]

Well its sad that its getting to the point where gays lesbian transgenders etc... are almost excepted. i mean i have nothing against them but to me thats just plain wrong and morally incorect. doesnt have much to do with this topic but yeah........

Do you mean accepted? Or excepted?

[Duzzy]

Don't want it to happen?

Get people to care.

Here is the tricky part...

Get people to care about others at near the same level they care about themselves. Democracy/Republics cannot exist in a selfish society, some dead French dude said that hundreds of years ago when he visited the US. He said that the only reason we were surviving as a nation was because people cared about the common good. We have lost that vision. This country will eventually fall, unless people want it to be fixed. And unless you are out there trying to fix things, then you don't want it badly enough.

[CaptaiN_JacK]

Here are some more of my views:
-Free market would be perfect....only in a utopian society, which we are far from
-The US will fall because of the youth going through the school systems today. 50 years ago we were ahead of the world in education, and now we are almost at rock bottom (at least in civilized countries, Europe, Japan, etc.) The US, in many decades, will beome the place that other countries out-source jobs too. It will be full of high-school educated idiots that are only good at manual labor.
-Tax cuts in war time? It proves the point that if you promise money, no matter what kind of fiscal crisis your country is in, people will be happy (and elect you, as we have already seen)
-maxama10-ask some gay people in your school/work if they chose to be how they are. Most will reply no (I interviewed about 6 gay/lesbian people in our school for a story for our school news-magazine. 6/6 said they never chose to be gay, it just happened, and they couldn't really prevent it). Tell me how you would feel if a transformation took place in you that you couldn't prevent, and then people discriminated aginst you for it. It's the same as blacks during the civil rights movement, they didn't choose to be black, and yet people discriminated against them for it.

[matt-o]

this dosnt happen because our politicians realise that they would be getting rid of their own jobs by doing this. also people know that the government simply havding out cash isnt good for them in the long haul

[Lohman446]

this dosnt happen because our politicians realise that they would be getting rid of their own jobs by doing this. also people know that the government simply havding out cash isnt good for them in the long haul

you don't think the $300 per child that was given out in the summer effected the last election? This was an effort by both the executive and legistlative branch.. but only one person took credit for him. Was the effect great? Maybe not, but I would have to argue in an election so close that anything that had any effect mattered.

[Lohman446]

-maxama10-ask some gay people in your school/work if they chose to be how they are. Most will reply no (I interviewed about 6 gay/lesbian people in our school for a story for our school news-magazine. 6/6 said they never chose to be gay, it just happened, and they couldn't really prevent it). Tell me how you would feel if a transformation took place in you that you couldn't prevent, and then people discriminated aginst you for it. It's the same as blacks during the civil rights movement, they didn't choose to be black, and yet people discriminated against them for it.

I don't mean to argue with you on this, or bring it to a front of a discussion. Frankly I don't care - but comparing gay to being black.. while you MAY be right on the genetics of it it is not proven. Even if I give you genetics (jury is still out) its not like being black. Right or wrong, like it or not, you can mask being gay - you cannot mask (there were exceptions) being black.


I don't agree with discriminating against anyone. Its simply wrong based on the human right to exist and my own beleif in ethical hedonism (basically as long as it doesn't hurt any non-participant or anyone disadvanted (children)) then I don't care what you do. However, I think this statement (comparing it to race) is so much of a stretch that it hurts your argument. Genetic... predisposed - it MAY be... like I said scientifically the jury is still out on that. I would argue that who one chooses to sleep with is a lot of choice and sometimes as much about image as anything else. Thats as close as I'm going to get to the subject though.

[frntplayer]

Also, free market would lead to monopolies so fast it wouldn't be funny. Government needs to be present to both stop monopolies and make sure competition stays stimulated.

Thats simply not true, in a free market, which we should have, but we have more of a merchantilism economy, monopolies don't jsut start up over night, and government interevention in the past to stop "monopolies" are just foundless, and we persued by political entrepeneurs that wanted to hurt the competition in any way possible. Take standard oil for instance, they cut down prices lower then all the competition, by mergers and vertical integrations, and new devolpments, the other oil companies, instead of making their oil cheaper, they went to the govt. and cried monopolie, and then the govt. forced a break up, breaking up a good company and costing them money.

Government does not belong in the economy, in every instance of government control, it has failed and had the opposite effect. The new deal, while thinking it helped, it didn't, it made the great depression worse, and made it last longer, the only reason we got out of it was that WW2 hit and those presidents cut down regulations.The increase of taxes and regualtions on buisness's only hampered there efforts to emply people, the wages minimums also hindered, the wpa, nra, etc etc, all took money away from the citizens to pay other people, and they accomplished no work. The energy crisis of the 1970's, those were a direct reaction of oil price controls, and all attemps at central planning failed. The cali energy crisis was also caused directly by regulations, the energy companies were forced not build any new plants, and the prices were capped, the demand grew and the supply couldn't, so crisis.

Central government planning of the economy doesn't work, look at all the communistic and socialistic countries, they all failed, theres a reason for that. Government can not plan something as complex as an economy, it doesn't work. Let people do whats in the best intrests of their company, and the best intrest of money making, and if people don't like what they are doing, they won't buy their products, simple as that. All government interferance with the economy has failed and accomplished only the opposite, take for instance minimum wage laws, they hurt companies by making them pay someone more for actions that dont require that pay, taxes same thing, more taxes there are the mroe the people hurt. If you want to see a great economy, get rid of the govt. regs and taxes, and you will see.


Ed

[Lohman446]

Ed... well I agree, to some degree with a lot of what you say - you have overly simplified something that you acknowledge as a very complex system. There are times for governmental regulations - and there are times when it is useful. Is it over used - yeh, its used about 90% more of the time than it should be, but there are times when its useful and good

[frntplayer]

Well there are very few, but those few are very nessacary, but are more laws then regulations, such as property rights and contractual enforcement, but they over use them so much, the places that govenment control is contradicitory is in price ceilings and floors, butting themelves into management, taking taxes that are overburndening, giving money to failing companies, "stimulating" economy with new money (inflation), minimum wage laws, etc. etc. the list goes on.


Ed

[spantol]

i mean i have nothing against them but to me thats just plain wrong and morally incorect.

Care to back that statement up at all, or was it just a drive-by?

If the former, bonus points will be awarded for doing so without invoking the will of an imaginary friend. It's one thing to be put off by such activity--I find it a bit icky, myself--but to simply assert that it's "just plain wrong and morally incorect" seems to paint with too broad a brush.