Government vs. You - Political Fever

Lumara · #1 (**permalink**) 05-09-2008, 11:14 PM

I really like the organization Downsize DC and wanted to share their most recent blog which makes some excellent points. I especially liked the part I put in bold below.

Part of the problem now which this blog doesn't address is the decreasing ability of communities to take care of themselves because the ever-expanding central government is expected to do this instead. This state of affairs has eliminated the sense of personal responsibility in a large portion of the populace.

Quote:

Government vs. You

In 1871 the city of Chicago burned to the ground. There was no FEMA or large federal funding to rebuild it. Instead, the people of Chicago rebuilt their own city and in short order it soared to new heights.

In 1906, after a major earthquake, the city of San Francisco also burned down. There was no FEMA or large federal funding to rebuild it. Instead, the people of San Francisco did it themselves and the city was soon restored.

In 2005 a large part of the city of New Orleans was destroyed when a levy, designed, built, and maintained by government, proved inadequate to protect against a hurricane that was far from the worst that could have struck the city. Private citizens and businesses such as Wal-Mart rushed to the city's aid, but were largely blocked by federal officials. FEMA and large federal funding were there to rebuild the city, but today much of New Orleans still lies in ruins.

We see the evidence all around us, where government seeks to help, harm often follows. Education, food, energy, and medical care are all areas where the government alleges it helps you, but all are areas where prices are rising faster than in other sectors.

Government doesn't work, because government has no incentive to succeed. Instead, government prospers by failing -- constantly gaining new power and resources because of the crises it creates.

You can read the rest of the blog here: DownsizeDC.org Blog | . . . for Human Progress DC vs. Innovation

GeneCosta · #2 (**permalink**) 05-09-2008, 11:40 PM

Ditching republicanism for democracy would be a revolutionary start.

Oregon Elephant · #3 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 01:30 AM

in 1871 and 1906, there was no federal government help, but there was tons of state government help. It wasn't just the people.

Finny · #4 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeneCosta

Ditching republicanism for democracy would be a revolutionary start.

Why would we ditch Republicanism? As this nation is a Constitutional Republic. Shall we let the rule of the majority make the minority suffer? Is that what you want?

I bet you wouldn't be saying this if you worried about the Conservative base running your lives..

I keep on asking you.. why don't you move to Cuba, if you have such an issue with how things are ran here?

Finny · #5 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregon Elephant

in 1871 and 1906, there was no federal government help, but there was tons of state government help. It wasn't just the people.

That was the point of the Author. That State's handled things better. That no matter how many times the Federal Government tells you they know best.. its always the Federal Government screwing you over.

Finny · #6 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumara

I really like the organization Downsize DC and wanted to share their most recent blog which makes some excellent points. I especially liked the part I put in bold below.

Part of the problem now which this blog doesn't address is the decreasing ability of communities to take care of themselves because the ever-expanding central government is expected to do this instead. This state of affairs has eliminated the sense of personal responsibility in a large portion of the populace.

You can read the rest of the blog here: DownsizeDC.org Blog | . . . for Human Progress DC vs. Innovation

On a side note for you, Lumara..

I know the guys who run DownsizeDC.org. Jim Babka is a friend.

micfranklin · #7 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 11:58 AM

It's 2008 and how much of New Orleans has been restored?

Oregon Elephant · #8 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finny

That was the point of the Author. That State's handled things better. That no matter how many times the Federal Government tells you they know best.. its always the Federal Government screwing you over.

One could come to the conclusion that the states can do it better because they don't have all the restrictions that the Feds have. Government is government, whether it is the local, state, or federal level, the only difference is the total size, and the power to population ratio. They're like two seperate football teams, they may have different players and different tactics, but they are still each playing the same game.

SamInTheSouth · #9 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregon Elephant

in 1871 and 1906, there was no federal government help, but there was tons of state government help. It wasn't just the people.

There is nothing wrong with that. That's how the Founders set this nation up. They didn't want a strong central government. They feared it, in fact.

Oregon Elephant · #10 (**permalink**) 05-10-2008, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheSouth

There is nothing wrong with that. That's how the Founders set this nation up. They didn't want a strong central government. They feared it, in fact.

The point is not about which government did it, be it the state or the federal, but that it was the government that did it, not just the people.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password