The role of the federal government in our lives

[RecycleMichael]

We had a good conversation going in the Libya thread and thought we should start the conversation as a spin-off.

Gaspar and I see government differently. I wrote:

Government can make a positive difference in lives. Government is not just an necessary evil. I know hundreds of government employees who work incredibly hard for fair wages who make my life better. By reading the comments of gaspar and guido, you would think that everything connected to government is inefficient, corrupt and just trying to interfere with their life. They act like if it is government, it should be spit on.


 

He countered with:

I don't believe that.  I only believe that some of the actions of government are inefficient, corrupt and attempts to control our lives.  Primarily those actions that are adopted in the name of "fairness," and those that limit the economic freedom of the people.  Government cannot give without taking, and there is not a single example of efficient behavior in this respect.

We are a nation of people of diverse mindsets and an increasing number of us are demanding that our sustenance be derived from government distribution.  This is the natural evolution of a free society.  There will always be a small number of us that resist this political progress, because we understand the path.  Ultimately we can do nothing to stop it, but perhaps we can wake up a few minds to slow the progression.

What do others think?

[Gaspar]

My whole post:

I don't believe that.  I only believe that some of the actions of government are inefficient, corrupt and attempts to control our lives.  Primarily those actions that are adopted in the name of "fairness," and those that limit the economic freedom of the people.  Government cannot give without taking, and there is not a single example of efficient behavior in this respect.

We are a nation of people of diverse mindsets and an increasing number of us are demanding that our sustenance be derived from government distribution.  This is the natural evolution of a free society.  There will always be a small number of us that resist this political progress, because we understand the path.  Ultimately we can do nothing to stop it, but perhaps we can wake up a few minds to slow the progression.

In the long run progressive politics always wins, and societies become centralized, socialized, and individual economic liberty regulated.  It is a losing battle for conservatives, and those of us with a libertarian mindset, however the battle is worth it if only to preserve a small portion of our freedoms for our children to enjoy.

Don't let us bother you.  In the end, we are losers.  Progressive politics wins, because it promises everything it cannot deliver.

It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money. – P.J. O'Rourke

In increasing numbers, Americans believe that it is the responsibility – nay, the duty – of the federal government to take the earnings of some Americans and redistribute them to other Americans for various and sundry "good" reasons including "fairness." Citizens who know it is wrong to use force to take money from a neighbor have rationalized that it is OK for the government to do it for them. – Linda Bowles

The fact throughout history is that whenever government dominates the economic affairs of its citizenry, a free society is eroded, then destroyed, and a minority government ensues. Personal liberty without economic liberty is an absolute contradiction; the one cannot exist without the other. – William E. Simon

What seems fair enough against a squalid huckster of bad liquor may take on a different face, if used by a government determined to suppress political opposition under the guise of sedition. – Learned Hand

In a free society the state does not administer the affairs of men. It administers justice among men who conduct their own affairs. – Walter Lippmann

Central planning will eventually destroy individual liberty by concentrating all political power in one person or in a committee; furthermore, it will eventually end our prosperity by laying the dead hand of state control on the economy. – Robert M. Thornton

[RecycleMichael]

We are a nation of people of diverse mindsets and an increasing number of us are demanding that our sustenance be derived from government distribution.  

Do you think that this increasing number of people looking to get some government assistance is influenced by an incredibly widening gap between the rich and poor?

As the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Would it not be natural for some to look for assistance?

Many have seen the government take care of the disadvantaged their whole lives. There are very few families that doesn't have a senior citizen receiving Medicare and Medicaid. If our Presidents are bailing out Wall Street, why not their street?

"The role of government is to take care of those in the dawn of life, the young; those in the dusk of live, the elderly; and those in the shadows of life, the disadvantaged."

Hubert H Humphrey

[Teatownclown]

It's about giving a hand up instead of a hand out.

Surely, we could start to gain a grip if there were means testing for entitlements and putting an end to corporate welfare as well! This should be tax reforms mantra. Sadly, they are hardly discussed.

[Gaspar]

Politics is and has always been the art of obtaining money from the rich and votes from the poor on the pretext of protecting each from the other.

The gap between wealth and poverty is not nearly as important as the opportunity for the poor to build wealth.  The problem is that the opportunities to engage in the very same free enterprise that made the successful wealthy is diminishing.

People are trading opportunity for security and receiving neither.

In answer to your second question, Yes.  It is natural for the poor to seek assistance.  This is the great burden.  It is what ultimately brings down governments.  The weight of the very dependency that politicians seek is ultimately their undoing.  Again, there is no way to stop this, only to slow its progress.

Education is by far the best way I know of to fight poverty, however that choice too has been delivered unto the hands of government, and rather than producing exception and recognizing achievement, the goal is to promote the average and celebrate fairness. We treat our children like shrubs, if one grows too tall we hack it down to match the rest.

As for your third question, I don't think even the most dedicated liberal arm-band wearer will celebrate the job that Medicare and Medicaid have done.  In attempting to make medicine affordable to some, they have succeed in making unfordable to all.  And now we propose to expand this system.

Sure, we bailed out banks. Why?  Because we through the force of government required them to make loans to those who could not pay under the false guise of some government guarantee.  Those loans were packaged and sold under that imaginary guarantee, and exactly what everyone knew would happen, happened. We should have let them go under.  We should have let GM go under.  It would have been devastating on the American people, but would have taught a lesson that we are now destine to learn again, and perhaps again.


For those looking for security, be forewarned that there's nothing more insecure than a political promise. – Harry Browne

Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. – Ludwig von Mises

It's not an endlessly expanding list of rights – the "right" to education, the "right" to health care, the "right" to food and housing. That's not freedom, that's dependency. Those aren't rights, those are the rations of slavery – hay and a barn for human cattle. – Alexis De Tocquiville

[guido911]

It's about giving a hand up instead of a hand out.

Surely, we could start to gain a grip if there were means testing for entitlements and putting an end to corporate welfare as well! This should be tax reforms mantra. Sadly, they are hardly discussed.

By "means testing", are you referring to rich people who pay tons of money into social security and when they retire they don't get their money back? And for purposes of this discussion, what exactly is "corporate welfare"?

[Conan71]

Do you think that this increasing number of people looking to get some government assistance is influenced by an incredibly widening gap between the rich and poor?

IMO, that's not it at all.  I think the stigma of receiving benefits has slowly eroded with time much like social stigmas like having children out of wedlock and divorce has eroded as well.  Less educated people have come to believe the government has unlimited funds and exists to provide for all their needs: housing, food, medicine, transportation, communication.  They don't have a clue what mechanism funds this and they don't care.  When the government sends out a stimulus check it's a bonus for doing absolutely nothing.  The government has rewarded thoughtless reproduction and laziness.  

FDR's social programs were supposed to be a hand-up through hard times, instead they've become a legacy of permanent dependence for some people.  The Federal government took the place of the church, synagogue, or mosque as the primary provider of charity.  

When we've tried mass scale programs to bring prosperity to the "have-nots" via home ownership programs, SBA programs, student loans, grants, etc. it gets bastardized by the haves as yet one more opportunity for a revenue stream and before long the program is going in the toilet because what started out as a noble initiative has been abused into something so far from the original intent you have a hard time figuring out what that intent was.  We mistakenly believe that trying to force-place prosperity will result in previously irresponsible people suddenly re-prioritizing and becoming responsible.  It's very hard to change someone's basic tendencies through a government program.  If someone was chronically late with their rent or evicted from one apartment after another, there's very little hope they won't default on a government-backed mortgage with really nothing out of their own pocket at stake. 

Better educated people realize the government doesn't run on unlimited funding, but they figure as long as everyone else is gaming the government, they might as well get their share.  That takes place in the form of accepting grants they really don't need, cheating on taxes, various frauds committed against public assistance either as the end-user or a provider, etc.

Government tries to do too much to help too many.

[guido911]

Education is by far the best way I know of to fight poverty, however that choice too has been delivered unto the hands of government, and rather than producing exception and recognizing achievement, the goal is to promote the average and celebrate fairness. We treat our children like shrubs, if one grows too tall we hack it down to match the rest.

You got that right. Exceptionalism and hard work should be celebrated, not discouraged.

[Townsend]

The Boeing Co. on Tuesday submitted its first application for job creation incentives offered by Oklahoma City as the aircraft giant begins its initial round of hiring for new operations near Tinker Air Force Base.

http://newsok.com/boeing-seeks-job-incentives/article/3551064

I guess some could see that and think "well if a multi-billion dollar business can file for incentives to be somewhere I could too".  The individual could think they have something to offer just like the corporation does...just in a smaller scale.  Why not get paid to be somewhere?

[guido911]

IMO, that's not it at all.  I think the stigma of receiving benefits has slowly eroded with time much like social stigmas like having children out of wedlock and divorce has eroded as well.  Less educated people have come to believe the government has unlimited funds and exists to provide for all their needs: housing, food, medicine, transportation, communication.  They don't have a clue what mechanism funds this and they don't care.  When the government sends out a stimulus check it's a bonus for doing absolutely nothing.  The government has rewarded thoughtless reproduction and laziness. 

Here is this mindset on full display:

[RecycleMichael]

You got that right. Exceptionalism and hard work should be celebrated, not discouraged.

They are celebrated. Everyday, everywhere in our lives. Everybody looks up to the entreprenuer, the risk-taker, the successful. I guess I don't understand your point.

Are there exemplary, hard-working examples of not being celebrated?

[RecycleMichael]

Here is this mindset on full display:

Why do you find individuals making stupid comments captured on YouTube relevant to a conversation? Am I supposed to post stupid thoughts by unknown people too?

[Townsend]

Why do you find individuals making stupid comments captured on YouTube relevant to a conversation? Am I supposed to post stupid thoughts by unknown people too?

Only if you're stuck without anything to add.

[guido911]

Why do you find individuals making stupid comments captured on YouTube relevant to a conversation? Am I supposed to post stupid thoughts by unknown people too?

Why do you consider them "stupid comments"? These people actually believe that the government has limitless supplies of money, which is precisely the point Conan was making. You don't like it because these uneducated and ignorant bottom feeders are what drives people like me from wanting government involved in our daily lives. You should be damned embarrassed because they are the natural consequence of your fanciful notion of government making a "positive difference."

And T, RM is a big boy and can handle himself.

[RecycleMichael]

I see many examples where government has solved a problem that private industry and personal responsibility did not.

My first example is the Tire Fund in the state of Oklahoma.

We now have to pay an extra $1 per tire (five dollars on a new car...includes the spare) that goes into a fund that guarantees proper recycling/disposal of old tires. Before the law was passed, there were large tire dumps all over the state breeding mosquitos and catching fire. There was also a pile behind many of our garages.

The fund got them cleaned up. It also paid for environmental groups like mine to do collections of tires. Now, these piles are virtually gone. New industries have popped up to reuse these tires and cement plants now have invested in equipment that allows them to be used as fuel.

The fund has done a great thing. Now people can make their lives safer by not storing tires.

Unfortunately, because the problem has been mostly solved, the fund has a cash balance. The legislature robs it for money to go into the general fund.

Whose fault is it that the fund gets raided? Is it the elected officials or the people who voted for them again and again after they raided it? Is it an unfair tax because rich people buy more new cars than poor people?

"give a man a fish and he can eat for a day. Give a man a job and he can eat for an hour, usually between noon and one."