If government is NOT the solution then what is the solution

a reply to: Stupidsecrets

Financial Security, opportunities, entertainment, ability to travel or relocate, security teams for protection, lawyers for legal and tax stuff, ability to bribe officials....

The list really never stops...

Oh and it all goes to their children.

a reply to: HalWesten

I though he was just Being really long winded in saying thT we only have 2 options..

1) trust the government to regulate big businesses...


2) trust big business to regulate itself..


There is no third option..

Not trusting the government, is inherently trusting big business to do it..


I honestly think that is the major motivation behind all the anti-government stuff...fake news, all government is bad government, type stuff..

The coporate powers that be do not need to make you love and trust them ... they just have to make you hate the government.

originally posted by: Anathros
The best solution is that those who want a large socialist government that takes care of them should move to a socialist country. Those that want a smaller government more in line with what the founding fathers had intended should stay.

That would be best for both sides.

I am in total agreement with this solution. And I'm sure if people are having transportation problems we can find more than enough people that would be willing to help fund that. I will be the first volunteer.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Stupidsecrets

We all eat food. We all buy cloths. We all die. Your post has nothing to do with my OP. This NOT a discussion of "better off" as subjective judgment. This is a conversation about facts and money. This is a fact:

"In 2015, the six Waltons on the Forbes 400 list were worth $136.1 billion, making them the richest family in the United States. They have more wealth than 43% of American families combined. Their net worth is nearly equal to the combined wealth of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett."

This fact is not disputed. The question of the OP is what should be done about it. What is your solution? Or do you believe NOTHING should be done. I'm not interesting in talking about Oprah's lifestyle.

Should be done about what? Why do you see the Walton family having so much money as being a problem?

Jealousy. He'll deny it, but when people think that someone shouldn't have wealth, it's usually because they're jealous. They take that jealousy and turn it against the other person and try to control them so they don't have as much. It's sad, really.

a reply to: JustJohnny
Steve Jobs and Warren Buffet have turned thousands of people into millionaires and fattened the pensions of millions of average people. There have been thousands of radio/tv talk show hosts, but only one Oprah.

Why do you expect an equal level of opportunities, entertainment, travel, etc as them? They provide service to millions. If you helped that many people you would be compensated very well too.

You can go to the store and not get mobbed by everybody. You can dine in millions of places they couldn't go. You don't have to deal with their security issues. You have the opportunity to do things they'll never be able to do in many ways.

If television/media didn't glorify money so much most people really wouldn't care how rich others are at all.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I think most adults just don't like being told what to do?

If I had a choice, I'd choose 'no Government' and let the people decide on things as a whole, sort of like referendum's for all things, 'yes' or 'no', each referendum wins on voting power but by the people, the people who keep the Country's running in the first place because if it wasn't for 'us', there would be no Economy, there would be no CEO's getting rich off of other's backs.

Also, if owners of banks were to give back an interest rate which is the same as what they get for overdrafts, then we'd all be rich and living happily, after all, money comes from nowhere to lend it to us but if we take overdrafts which again comes from nowhere and can't afford to pay it back plus the interest, the bailiff's come in and take what we have, how is this system a fair one?

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: dfnj2015

From my OP:

I classify every statement three ways. Either it helps the rich by doing nothing because the current system is rigged in the billionaire’s favor. Or it helps the rich by doing something (lowering tax rates on billionaires). Or as a public policy it might do something to address wealth inequality in this country. The rest of the political commentary here on ATS is hyperbole or BS.

Money talks, everything else no so much.

If bigger government was the solution we wouldn't have any problems. We have increased the size of government constantly since I was born. We should be a damn utopia by now. At least when Apple or Ford decide they want more money they can raise the price while still give us the option not to buy. When government wants more money, which if you're being honest is in perpituity, we don't have a choice.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: dfnj2015

From my OP:

I classify every statement three ways. Either it helps the rich by doing nothing because the current system is rigged in the billionaire’s favor. Or it helps the rich by doing something (lowering tax rates on billionaires). Or as a public policy it might do something to address wealth inequality in this country. The rest of the political commentary here on ATS is hyperbole or BS.

Money talks, everything else no so much.

If bigger government was the solution we wouldn't have any problems. We have increased the size of government constantly since I was born. We should be a damn utopia by now. At least when Apple or Ford decide they want more money they can raise the price while still give us the option not to buy. When government wants more money, which if you're being honest is in perpituity, we don't have a choice.

Exactly.

A better question for the OP to think about is for him to name one thing government runs well besides the military....

a reply to: dfnj2015

The less integrity society has, the more government will grow and insert itself into our lives. Since today's society has no sense of personal responsibility, neither do the officials that we elect. Big surprise.

Clean the inside of the cup first. If you do this, then you will have a stabilizing unconscious influence on those around you.

That's how you fix a nation.

a reply to: dfnj2015

having no government at all or small government would be like some states in mexico, and south america there's places the governments military don't or won't go. the strong and killing types that don't have any compassion for others would rule. you'd be down on your knees before them. if you could manage to get a small handful of your neighbors, can't call them your countrymen because there would be no government. the reason it would be a small handful is, cause most would be scared to go against them. plus they would have their own personal army, gangs call them what you will. after they put down your little stand against them, they would retaliate. they would make you watch as they rape your sons, daughters,wife and kill them. then more than likely torture you before they kill you in the most gruesome or disrespectful way they could think of as a example to others that maybe thinking like you did.

This may be considered a novel concept but...how bout we actually follow the constitution and return to being a federalist government?

Arguing for a smaller federal govt doesn't necessarily mean one is advocating for an absence of laws/regulations, or govt for that matter.
It's usually more about WHO has the authority to pass said laws/regulations. Many believe that, under the constitution, states, and only states, are given the authority to create many of the laws that the federal govt has taken for itself.

Read the federalist papers. It lays out pretty plainly the argument that was used to convince reps to buy into the new constitution. It explains the basic authority the states would be ceding to the feds (not much).

It's my belief that the closer a govt is to the people it represents, the more likely it is to understand (and care about) local issues and the more easily it is held to account.

This is the antithesis of globalism, which seeks to carve the world up into a few collective unions, like the E.U., and to govern these unions from some centralized location with very little elected representation.

It's an affront to the sovereignty of individuals and the sovereignty of nations.

The coporate powers that be do not need to make you love and trust them ... they just have to make you hate the government.

Ironic that the corporate powers that be are the real reason the government exists to support them and provide a platform for the corporate oligarchs to operate from. Work, consume, watch TV and STFU....

"The corporate powers that be do not need to make you love and trust them ... they just have to make you hate the government."

"Corporate powers" often times advocate for an increasingly larger govt, and the regulations that come with that, because it stifles competition and, through lobbying efforts, they usually see to it that that's the case.

What sets the United States apart from all other countries is that people are left to be who they want to be. Some aspire to be great. Some don't care about greatness but achieve it anyway. Like them or not, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Larry Page, Sergey Brin and others didn't expect to be who they became but each of them changed the world.

We only need government to ensure that we have an environment and opportunity to be what we want to be. There are different scales of this, sure. We can't all be Steve Jobs. I myself am almost out of time but I'm content about how far I was able to go. I'm a millionaire if you count my 401K and the value of my assets. not bad for a guy with no degree.

What bothers me about our government is that it (and particularly those on the left) just "give" things to people who don't earn them. I'm a serious proponent of helping people get out of the ghetto, the slums and off of welfare. Government (and the left) can't facilitate that. They through a bit if money over the fence and call it a day. It gives them some feeling of having done a good thing.

There are the mentally ill. They cannot be productive enough to earn a living wage. Those are the people we need to take care of and provide for. The people on the streets that everyone ignores. Everyone else can get their a$$ out and get a job to earn a living and spend it wisely. There are plenty of jobs but most poor Americans would rather let those jobs go to illegal migrants.

The Libertarian Party's slogan is Minimum Government Maximum Freedom.

No one thinks that government can go away completely.

Ours can be shrunk considerably. We might start by eliminating everything that isn't provided for in the Constitution.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

I wish I could give you a thousand stars for that post.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Personal responsibility

What a concept !!!!

WHO COULD HAVE THOUGHT IT...!

No, the government is not your mommy and daddy - grow up

Government isn't a bad thing.

The bad thing is that the Government is run by humans.
Humans currently operate in a society governed by Power and Greed.

You have to remove one or the other from the equation.
Since we are a long way from removing the Power/Greed structure in society, we then need to look at removing humans from Government... Or do we?

The issue isn't so much that the Governments are run by humans, its that the Governments are run by too few humans.
I know... Crazy paradigm way of thinking... Since so many want to make Government smaller.

We need to make Government bigger, more involved.
We have the technology not to convert Government to A.I., but to turn Government BACK to the People.
We no longer need heads of state, or local leaders to "speak for the people".
The people can do that now by themselves.

All we need is a foundation and framework to be created to allow all peoples of all countries to have a direct voice in how the country is run.
You want to go to War? The Government needs to ask the people in a generalized vote that every able bodied person can do via any smart device (PC, Console, Mobile and even voting machines).

All politics can be regionalized or nationalized... It would just come back to the new system to notify those living in the effected areas that there is a vote needing their attention.

Sure lots of people will complain that is will directly impact the everyday life of everyone with so many decisions needing to be made.
But I ask... Will it?
Is there actually that much that needs to be voted on? We all know how long it takes for things to pass the various levels of Government.
Whereas this would bypass a lot of the bureaucracy of it all and bypass a fair chunk of the "Pay to Play" or biases within the chosen "representatives".

You'd still need A.I. assistance regarding legal documents for proposed laws for the general governance, but that A.I. already exists, we just need to start utilizing it.

Can you imagine how the world would change when uber elite and corporations can no longer influence politics, because their one voice no longer counts as much as the peoples?
Sure you'd face a potential of these same people trying to buy votes from the people through various different forms, but their reach would be severely impaired.

a reply to: dfnj2015
Do please give me an example of a cost/result efficient government entity and I might agree with you. But currently there are none. From the EPA to the FCC to the FDA. Not a single one operates within budget and has actually achieved anything remotely what it set out to do.

If you work for the EPA your job security isn't dependent on you actually protecting the environment. It's dependent on you using your current budget and making an argument for a bigger one next year.

Funny story. I met old J.B. Hunt himself while waiting to be loaded while working for a different trucking company. We were talking about different things and I showed him my truck so he could get a good look at a Volvo. He saw how clean it and commented on it. I said well I have to live in there when I am on the road so I try to keep it neat enough to drive wearing house slippers.

He made the offer to come to work for him when my contract was up. That he would buy me a Volvo if I wanted it instead of a Freightliner like everyone else and cut me a deal on the payments because I kept my truck nice inside. And that told him I was meticulous about doing things.

I thanked him and said I would consider it. Of course J.B. Is gone now but that’s the thing about a whole lot of rich people. They help people that they feel have merit to succeed. Why mess with that by trying to steal their earned wealth? Prior to the Income Tax, the super wealth in America used to compete with each other granting public gifts like libraries, colleges, public use centers, etc.