SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:03 AM
Original message |
|
That seems to be a common refrain from my friends over on the right-hand side of the political spectrum. But is the size of "government" that is really at the heart of the problem?
Don't we feel disenfranchised from a government that we look at as not the collective "us", but rather something seperate?
Aren't we, the poor and middle-class of this country, really tired of a government that we percieve does not work or represent in our behalf?
I think an argument could be made that merely reducing the size of our government, while being a feel-good reaction, would serve to increase our feelings of disenfranchisement from those that govern. That less regulatory oversight protecting our food, water, air, and civil rights would be disastrous.
We could have as small of government as we want but if it remains a government that represents the special interests of the monied few, if it remains a government set on lining the pockets of wealthy corporate interest with our tax dollars, if it remains a government that places the shareholder's dollar ahead of the health of it's own citizens then the problem will remain.
From my perspective it isn't the size of government that is at issue but rather the type of government we have. One that is engaged and responsive to the needs of the majority (the poor and the middle-class) or one that is in the pockets of the "too big to fail" monopolies that dominate our social/economic/political reality here in the USA.
---
|
bluethruandthru
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:06 AM
Response to Original message |
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
eilen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:24 AM
Response to Original message |
3. What parts of government do they think should be smaller? |
|
And what are their solutions to take up the work that those parts do now?
What are the results of this being done elsewhere? Has it really decreased costs, is the job being done as well or better? And by whose metric? Is there a uninterested party doing the measuring?
I think that will either spur an interesting dialogue or a frustrated red-faced libertarian.
|
Myrina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message |
4. They want 'smaller govt' but then want the gov't to legislate our private lives. |
|
... so go figure. :shrug:
|
postulater
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:45 AM
Response to Original message |
5. We have a government of the people, by the people and for the people |
|
and now that corporations are people, there are a lot more of us.
The supreme court just made our government a whole lot larger.
|
Dappleganger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-28-10 09:56 AM
Response to Original message |
6. They conveniently forget that the military is part of the government. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:37 AM
Response to Original message |