Small Government? where?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Isn't it 'funny' how parties still invoke the 'Dems=Big Government, GOP=Small Govt" cliche?

As far as I can recall, neither party has ever managed to cut the cost of govt. In fact, with the establishment of new departments [Homeland Security, e.g.] and the pursuit of a War, government seems to be growing at previously unseen rates.

How is it possible that the myths remain untouched?




posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Because then people might figure out that govt. wants to create dependency on their system. In fact, the size and scope of government is the only thing the two parties seem to have in common, well excpet for sleeping with corps. and other things.

But anyway, Bush created the largest increase in the federal govt. since WW2 and that was before he created the Intelligence Czar position and anti-terror agency.



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I'm just surprised that people buy the myth. I mean, as our fearless leader says: "Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you"



posted on Nov, 16 2004 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Right here

www.lp.org...

The Big two are just playing a shell game with America. NEITHER will reduce the size of the Government, at least the Democrats are honest about it.

The Republicans run on this platform every year and have NEVER done it



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I'd like to know how this fabled myth of 'small government' is supposed to meaningfully regulate, hold to lawful account and direct (in the interests of 'the people') trans-national corporations and the nation-free ultra rich and powerful?

Since when were the main interests of the ultra wealthy and big business the same as 'the people's'? Clearly they are not.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:46 AM
link   
maybe that's why the LP hasn't become as big and powerful as the other two. As long as they don't believe in BIG government, they will always be part of the fringe.

it's true. corp interests are not the same as those of the people. But corp interests=power=electability. Big government is the insurance policy of political parties.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:54 AM
link   
It's definately not here....

President's New Freedom
Commission on Mental Health
Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America

www.mentalhealthcommission.gov...



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by seriously111
maybe that's why the LP hasn't become as big and powerful as the other two. As long as they don't believe in BIG government, they will always be part of the fringe.


- I think the 'big government' tag is just rhetoric really. I prefer to talk about 'effective' government or non effective governments.


it's true. corp interests are not the same as those of the people. But corp interests=power=electability. Big government is the insurance policy of political parties.


- Again I think we lose the point somewhat with these labels.
Let's face it, government for tens or hundreds of millions of people living in any kind of cohesive society is always going to be 'big' (and who defines this idea of 'big' anyway, eh?).

The point surely has got to be that effective government is what is missing right now and that we have allowed a mutant version of democracy to thrive where wealth (the like of which has never been seen before) is functioning to further it's interests and 'the people' far from having any kind of check or balance to this have been deleberately shut out of the 'system'.

It's neither a 'big' government nor a 'small' government thing IMO, it's a not functioning properly government thing.
Until we fix that this is all very interesting and all but it's still just diversion as they work away.


[edit on 17-11-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Seriously_111, you hit it right on the head. It is another one of the Republicans divisive tools. Dems=big gov't and Reps = small gov't is just not the case. The Republicans juvenile and simplistic arguments, for the most part, only work on the weak minded. The weak minded don't see the picture as it actually is. It's deception. It's brain washing. It's how you win elections.

Peace



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:40 AM
link   
your point about effective govt is well-taken.

The last few years have clearly been about centralised govt reclaiming its territory. Not only in the US, btw. Berlusconi, Blair and others have been following the same trends.

There is a danger in the flipside. The most effective examples have been dictatorships and other 'direct' structures. The nazis were incredibly effective as was Tito in Yugoslavia or Stalin et al.

What are the checks and balances to ensure the good sides of effective governing aren't corrupted by influence and interests? Sometimes I feel like we're probably best off with an ineffective government (hey at least nothing can go drastically wrong!). True, nothing will go dramatically right, either.

In away, that is what conservatism was originally about: Don't rock the boat. I'm not that conservative, but funnily, neither are those in office.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:47 AM
link   
The funniest myth is Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility. Or republicans are better for the economy. The truth is Republican policies are a joke, and do more harm then good.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Small Government? where?...

Come to sunny Somalia, no income tax, no duties, no sales tax...

A place where market forces can work their magical efficiencies unfettered by government restriction.

If there were any doubt small government does not work, countries like Somalia should convince even the most died in the wool conservative.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
There won't ever be this "Small government" that the right keep talking about.

Never has, never will be.

[edit on 17-11-2004 by RedOctober90]



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 05:59 PM
link   
actually, RedOctober, it is well on the way to becoming a reality in Australia. The Howard administration has, for a long time, been shrinking the size of government, removing measures for accountability in government, and outsourcing EVERYTHING! Everything from office stationery to software systems to power the government databases are being outsourced, in an effort to make the government more 'economical'. However, this mentality is fraught with danger. Historically, the smaller the government the more secretive, dictatorial, unaccountable and UNDEMOCRATIC it becomes. This isn't me talking, its professors at my university, where they recently had a big conference on this issue.

[edit on 17-11-2004 by General Zapata]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   
And they will pay the price for playing such dangerous politics.

Citizens always taking the hardest blow of course.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   
And they will pay the price for playing such dangerous politics.

Citizens always taking the hardest blow of course.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join