R
RMCG
- 2,050
- 48
Oh, I love this sort of thing. Let's get started, shall we?
Agreed, but there are those extreme Libs who essentially call for the elimination of government and expect *everyone* to operate by the same rules and keep the same boundaries. Which reminds me, Aqualab's ad here on the Farm? They've spelled it "boundries" and it's driving me up the fucking wall.
Hahahaha I thought I was the only one that noticed that banner! I hit refresh so it goes away as fast as possible. Spelling mistakes drive me NUTS.
What you described is most definitely not the 'Libertarian Vision', there needs to be a court system to decide who has been wronged (constitutional rights violated). It would not become a 'lawless' land, just a lot less laws of minutae. You don't need 100,000 rules defining how stealing is wrong and unjust.
It should not only not change, but other parties/political paradigms should adhere to the idea as well, in my opinion.
In my attempt to be brief, I left out a lot. Some areas can and perhaps should be privatized, others, not so much. We live in an interesting time, also, in that when these ideas were first bandied about we didn't have mega-corporations to contend with. I think most folks were thinking in terms of the types of businesses that America was founded upon--smaller businesses, some privately owned.
They absolutely should 'adhere to the idea', considering they are SWORN TO UPHOLD it! ie Nancy Pelosi's scoffing at the question "Where in the Constitution does it grant you the power to control Healthcare?" and her response? "Are you serious?"...
Hell, I think half of them mix up the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, they certainly don't carry around the pocket versions LIKE THEY SHOULD. I am sure we are now on some 'list', but certain political members have received numerous shipments of 'reference' material over past few years from my GF and I.
So what is wrong with 'mega corporations'? Google offers wifi broadband (infrastructure and service) FOR FREE to several cities in California. I don't think they didn't know about mega-corporations during that time, as there were lots of global companies then. How many mercantiles, shipping and trading companies, etc. These were the Sears and Roebucks and the Fedex's of the day. Paradigms shift, economics change, public perception decreases and these large corps fail, being undercut by the little guy who has a better, faster idea.
Hmm... Well, Blackwater taught us that harsh lesson re: privatization of law enforcement. What I think we've lost with government-based LE are the checks and balances. In fact, I believe we've lost a lot of checks and balances.
Yes, unfortunately Blackwater was a harsh example, but it was in a foreign country, during wartime, not a true 'Libertarian Experiment'.
Same here, grew up with an all-volunteer FD and currently live in a county where we've only just created a new tax base so we can pay a fire chief and one or two full time firefighters.
That said, I am all for abolishing the IRS. I don't believe we need to levy taxes so heavily or in the manner we do. I know, not believe, KNOW that the IRS is an entity unto itself, subject to no laws of the land or the checks and balances put in place by our representatives, and that NO ONE is safe from them. No one.
Historically speaking, the US's most BOOMING times were when citizens did not pay ANY or very low TAXES... ie Roaring 20's
Cato has great info/graphs, etc on the Mellon Tax cuts.
While I abhor paying FEDERAL taxes as I am not involved in interstate commerce, a very LOW tax rate will get and keep the economy rolling. Simplifying the tax code actually generates more money.
Heh, you, me and my husband could go on one hell of a tear about the DoE and the harm done during Jimmy's term when that was created. Remember, I'm in California and both my kids were 'educated' in this system, too.
It's worse than that. Our government has created a situation where it pays for the large corporations that we are now too heavily reliant upon for work and goods to take their manufacturing bases overseas. This is a problem.
That should also mean that our government protects more than a corporation's bottom line. The government, our government, is us, and should be on our side. But it's not. How'd that come to be? Lobbies.
Again, that is people in 'power' thinking they can be the 'invisible hand' of the markets vs letting free markets make micro corrections on its own. They think we are dumb and they are smart so they get to be the marionette. This government intrusion (for 'our own good') can be molested in such a way that they play favorites. This is NOT the governments job. But because we allow them to intrude in other places, they can overstep and intrude where they want. Why do they get to decide who can play the game? hell, they are even deciding the winners now...
Yes, I have. But, like the song says, if you want to have cities you've got to build roads. That is and should be the role of the government. If we leave it only to occur on the local level, though, then you'll have people like myself living in areas with a primarily elderly population who can't afford to keep roads up, let alone build them in the first place. And so, we have a lot of private dirt and gravel roads up here, we have a lot of people who live off-grid and who are on their own when the storms roll through.
If its primarily an elderly population, then the school budget would be nil. That is up to the state and local government and town planners. They can assess whatever direct tax on gasoline and diesel to pay for the STATE infrastructure of roadways.
I was mentioning the 'federal' infrastructure of 'Interstates'. I still believe those can be better, faster and cheaper that how the government is handling it, esp if it were owned by a 'mega corp'. For example, my state got a bunch of 'Obama' infrastructure money to do work on highways. They decided to tear up a 2 year old on-ramp and redo it, just so they didn't 'lose' the money...
We happen to live on a private road that is not maintained by the government. Portions of it we've been able to afford to repair, but since we can't get all neighbors on board with creating a trust account that we'd pay into annually (or whatever, we need a road repair kitty is my point) then we can only hit the worst sections. What has ended up happening is that a few neighbors are paying for the road repairs and bearing the majority of the burden, while EVERYONE gets to enjoy the road. This is absolutely unfair, some people are gaining use and enjoyment of something vital that they're not chipping in for. Using taxes and government alleviates this problem.
On one hand that seems it could be a workable solution. However, on the other hand it leaves us with the distinct possibility that only those localities that can afford to pay for these things having them. Then what? We are a whole nation, states united, ostensibly. See my post above about my neighborhood road. Worse yet, try driving the one section that seriously needs repair but won't be being repaired anytime soon.
I am familiar with 'private roads' as I came here from a very rural part of the NorthEast. But that is not what I am talking about. You have a 'non-maintained' road.
Who 'owns' your private road? Which of your neighbors?
All of them? one of them? How about you buy it, fix it up and levy a charge/toll for them to drive on it? There is no 'kitty' as that is socialist behavior.
Ahhh... well, seeing as how my husband works for the local phone company, which is also the local ISP and cable provider, we can discuss this stuff. Remember, I'm in a rural area, and right now the federal government has granted our local CLEC (all rural CLECs/ISPs) monies to bring inet services to those areas that are underserved. Up here in the Sierra that means mostly pushing a WIFI infrastructure, which is what my husband has been building out. In fact, his WIFI network has now outpaced both cable modem and DSL installs for his company. My point is that the government has helped those big boys roll out the broadband, they didn't do it all on their own.
But at what cost? IF the local LEC, ISP, cable provider did not see a pay off or sound investment, they chose not to do it for a reason, the government on the other hand does not care about the bottom line, as they don't have to answer to anyone. If those individuals were so smart, they would have created competition for your ISP/Cable company and cleaned up on service fees to the residents that used the service.
Oh my God! California DMV? :giggle
Our local post office has gone with subcontractors for deliveries. On a regular basis we do not receive important mail, and then might receive it with a note written on it (if the neighbor bothers, of course) "delivered to wrong address." It was better, MUCH better, when it was all-government employees.
Not a good comparison as the 'overall organization' is still the government, those subs are held to 'government standards', not private. A better comparison would be Fedex, DHL, UPS, hell even speedy carriers.
And, all that said, another one of my least favorite businesses to do business with are motorcycle repair shops. WTF is up with these prima donna mechanics who think their shit doesn't stink and they hold the golden key to repairing your bike? Assholes, overcharging, high-fiving motherfuckers. Private businesses who don't want my business. And don't even get me started on the gym we visited yesterday!
Yep, but that is the GREAT thing about private businesses! You can find another one. Or if that's the only shop in town, someone can make some competition for them and put them out of business. We talk about it frequently in my household regarding (human and animal) hospitals, we all know of 'good ones' and 'bad ones', what happens when there are only 'government ones'?