Jump to content

What government service do you directly or indirectly rely on?


rukawa
 Share

Recommended Posts

By this I mean goods you could not easily obtain without government of some form and you rely on directly (use them yourself) or indirectly (something you use requires them)

- currency

- roads

- sewage systems, storm drainage and clean water systems

- courts  and legal system (indirectly)

- America's military (I live in Canada)

- Police

 

The above are essential and with the exception of clean water and sewage already were provided over 100 years ago when there was no income tax. The following are  nice to haves but not essential:

 

- Securities regulations covering report requirements for stocks etc..

- Banking regulations

- Food regulations and drug regulations

- Only clean air environment regulations..not any other enviro regs

- Building codes, fire codes

 

Stuff I don't need from government meaning that I either don't need it or I think I could obtain it in other ways:

- public education

- healthcare

- all anti-discrimination regulations and all Civil Rights laws

- all attempts at economic redistribution

- Almost all environmental regulations

- A pension (this is one others will need but I don't)

- Disability laws

- Labour laws

- Marriage laws & family law - alimony, divorce, child support

- Attempts to deal with climate change

- Licensing laws

- Drug laws

- All University funding including R&D

-  Welfare

- Unemployment insurance

- Immigration laws

- All consumer regulations

- Safety regulations

- Parks

- Libraries

- Recreation centers

- Affirmative Action

- Gun laws

- All telecom and media regulations

- anti-trust regulation

- utility regulation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Let's see. Government services that I directly or indirectly rely on:

 

1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**.

 

Libertarianism = Communism.  Both completely detached from reality.

 

Is the government this monstrous inefficient behemoth that you have to chop some of its hydra heads every few years to keep it small? Sure.  Does the government make horrendous economic and other decisions? Sure.  Does this mean that there's a better alternative system? No, and it's enough to study history and how we got here.  It's enough to go live for a few years in various countries around the world to figure this out.

 

It is the Institutions that make America great.

 

I once saw these arguments by parents that don't want to treat their kid in a hospital because they do not want any help from the government.  And you had these really smart people supporting them.  The fact is they were supported by the governments of past and present since they were conceived int their mother's womb. Yet, they completely fail to see that. Cognitive bias is a bitch.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see. Government services that I directly or indirectly rely on:

 

1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**.

 

Libertarianism = Communism.  Both completely detached from reality.

 

Is the government this monstrous inefficient behemoth that you have to chop some of its hydra heads every few years to keep it small? Sure.  Does the government make horrendous economic and other decisions? Sure.  Does this mean that there's a better alternative system? No, and it's enough to study history and how we got here.  It's enough to go live for a few years in various countries around the world to figure this out.

 

It is the Institutions that make America great.

 

I once saw these arguments by parents that don't want to treat their kid in a hospital because they do not want any help from the government.  And you had these really smart people supporting them.  The fact is they were supported by the governments of past and present since they were conceived int their mother's womb. Yet, they completely fail to see that. Cognitive bias is a bitch.

 

Conflating Anarchism with Libertarianism....nice....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its money stealing service. I can rely on the fact that significant sums of money will be stolen from my every paycheck.

If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Ha, that isn't just not true, but it is colossally not true, the very opposite of true.  If there was a functioning capitalist society without all of the drag of government (taxes, inflation, regulations, government workers taking 15% of human capital out of the productive society, etc, etc, etc,)  I'd likely be making many times my current spending power.  L. Neil Smith says 8X your current spending power, but that might be an overly optimistic estimate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm a factor owner, I need a personal militia to protect the workers, equipment, manufactured goods, transportation to end users, collect money and deposit etc etc. The militia will lost out to thieves who have more fire power. I've to constantly spend more $ on arms. A common army/police/law enforcement spreads the costs around.

 

I cannot imagine what the citizens have to endure. The rich will have their own militia. Just max max in real life.

 

Taxes pay for our security. If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Its money stealing service. I can rely on the fact that significant sums of money will be stolen from my every paycheck.

If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Ha, that isn't just not true, but it is colossally not true, the very opposite of true.  If there was a functioning capitalist society without all of the drag of government (taxes, inflation, regulations, government workers taking 15% of human capital out of the productive society, etc, etc, etc,)  I'd likely be making many times my current spending power.  L. Neil Smith says 8X your current spending power, but that might be an overly optimistic estimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see. Government services that I directly or indirectly rely on:

 

1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**.

 

Libertarianism = Communism.  Both completely detached from reality.

 

Is the government this monstrous inefficient behemoth that you have to chop some of its hydra heads every few years to keep it small? Sure.  Does the government make horrendous economic and other decisions? Sure.  Does this mean that there's a better alternative system? No, and it's enough to study history and how we got here.  It's enough to go live for a few years in various countries around the world to figure this out.

 

It is the Institutions that make America great.

 

I once saw these arguments by parents that don't want to treat their kid in a hospital because they do not want any help from the government.  And you had these really smart people supporting them.  The fact is they were supported by the governments of past and present since they were conceived int their mother's womb. Yet, they completely fail to see that. Cognitive bias is a bitch.

 

I get it. You refuse to answer the question because you don't like where the answer leads.

 

Its money stealing service. I can rely on the fact that significant sums of money will be stolen from my every paycheck.

If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Do you mean income taxes or all taxes. The income didn't exist for a long time in both Canada and the US. If I go on economic growth...the US and Canada were both doing fine before a substantial income tax was introduced. The income tax doesn't seem to have increased the trend.

 

But if I go based on innovation which I should since it is what truly determines growth....well then your argument completely collapses. The 19th century period with no income tax was vastly more innovative and the innovations had far larger impact than any other period of human history. In fact a very strong argument could be made that even the period after the nineteenth century was running based on growth that was largely derivative of ideas and inventions of the 19th century. For instance, the automobile, television, telephone, most of the advances in chemistry, electricity and electrification, plumbing, steel...all this is largely derivative of 19th century ideas and society. With scientific ideas you are talking about fluid mechanics, electromagnetism, special relativity and general relativity, the beginnings of quantum mechanics, thermodynamics and statistical physics. In Math the development is huge.

 

The era of big government really begins post WW2.

 

The truly new innovations that belong to the era of big government are the internet, smartphones, and computers....all ideas that trace back to the 1950's to the 1970's period. In science its the complete development of quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, almost all of biology, massive advances in chemistry. Big government accomplished pretty incredible things in science during the period from about 1950-1980 maybe especially in biology.

 

If I were to compare the two periods I definitely would not say that the 20th century is clearly better than the other in terms of innovation, growth or new scientific ideas. So I'm not exactly clear how eliminating income taxes would increase my income. At best an argument could be made that my income would not change much after taking into account the additional services I would be paying for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see why business owners would pass any tax savings onto their employees. If anything it will be passed onto consumers resulting in lower revenues. In fact you'll probably see individuals lose purchasing power as private entities take over government services and increase prices for those services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see why business owners would pass any tax savings onto their employees. If anything it will be passed onto consumers resulting in lower revenues. In fact you'll probably see individuals lose purchasing power as private entities take over government services and increase prices for those services.

 

Everything government does (which you are calling "services") would be more cheaply, efficiently, and effectively be done by competing people/companies in the private sector.  The government wastes oceans of resources when ever it does anything.  Often things governments waste tons of money on wouldn't need to be done at all.  You are overestimating the effectiveness of government "services" by an astounding amount.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm a factor owner, I need a personal militia to protect the workers, equipment, manufactured goods, transportation to end users, collect money and deposit etc etc. The militia will lost out to thieves who have more fire power. I've to constantly spend more $ on arms. A common army/police/law enforcement spreads the costs around.

 

I cannot imagine what the citizens have to endure. The rich will have their own militia. Just max max in real life.

 

Taxes pay for our security. If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Its money stealing service. I can rely on the fact that significant sums of money will be stolen from my every paycheck.

If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Ha, that isn't just not true, but it is colossally not true, the very opposite of true.  If there was a functioning capitalist society without all of the drag of government (taxes, inflation, regulations, government workers taking 15% of human capital out of the productive society, etc, etc, etc,)  I'd likely be making many times my current spending power.  L. Neil Smith says 8X your current spending power, but that might be an overly optimistic estimate.

 

Thing is, imagination is not necessary.  Plenty of examples in the world today. People who live in the free rich world tend to underestimate the importance of the Institutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see. Government services that I directly or indirectly rely on:

 

1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**.

 

Libertarianism = Communism.  Both completely detached from reality.

 

Is the government this monstrous inefficient behemoth that you have to chop some of its hydra heads every few years to keep it small? Sure.  Does the government make horrendous economic and other decisions? Sure.  Does this mean that there's a better alternative system? No, and it's enough to study history and how we got here.  It's enough to go live for a few years in various countries around the world to figure this out.

 

It is the Institutions that make America great.

 

I once saw these arguments by parents that don't want to treat their kid in a hospital because they do not want any help from the government.  And you had these really smart people supporting them.  The fact is they were supported by the governments of past and present since they were conceived int their mother's womb. Yet, they completely fail to see that. Cognitive bias is a bitch.

 

I get it. You refuse to answer the question because you don't like where the answer leads.

 

I did answer it.

 

"1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**."

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm a factor owner, I need a personal militia to protect the workers, equipment, manufactured goods, transportation to end users, collect money and deposit etc etc. The militia will lost out to thieves who have more fire power. I've to constantly spend more $ on arms. A common army/police/law enforcement spreads the costs around.

 

I cannot imagine what the citizens have to endure. The rich will have their own militia. Just max max in real life.

 

Taxes pay for our security. If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Its money stealing service. I can rely on the fact that significant sums of money will be stolen from my every paycheck.

If taxes did not exist you would make less money.

 

Ha, that isn't just not true, but it is colossally not true, the very opposite of true.  If there was a functioning capitalist society without all of the drag of government (taxes, inflation, regulations, government workers taking 15% of human capital out of the productive society, etc, etc, etc,)  I'd likely be making many times my current spending power.  L. Neil Smith says 8X your current spending power, but that might be an overly optimistic estimate.

 

Thing is, imagination is not necessary.  Plenty of examples in the world today. People who live in the free rich world tend to underestimate the importance of the Institutions.

 

There is a middle ground between rkbabang, no government position and your "everything the government has ever done I require" position. That is my position...that a government like that which existed in the 19th century and was an order of magnitude smaller than the one that currently exists was capable of providing all the adequate institutions to produce both internal security, progress and economic growth. Now I would probably add a few things to that government that rkbabang would disagree with but that I think have proven their worth...a government currency for example. I haven't seen anyone so far provide a substantial argument against what I'm saying.

 

I did answer it.

 

"1. Existing.

 

EVERY aspect of my life has been supported by the present government or **past**.

 

It not a great answer and its completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. It also has to be the most insanely conservative things I've ever heard in my life. The US government once paid people to catch run-away slaves. Most of the segregation today in US cities is the product of US government policy. So every aspect of your life has been supported by these actions of your government according to you. Do you think they should have been continued. All I see in your answer is a refusal to critically examine the existing situation. 

 

Humans have this ability to imagine worlds other than the ones they inhabit with different pasts and different actions and then ask how the world would have changed. Call it counterfactual reasoning. If we didn't have that progress would be impossible since there would never be any reason to change anything ever...everyone would give your answer: every aspect in my life has been supported by the present institutions or past ones. They would be unable to imagine anything different.

 

We can imagine an alternate world, meiroy, where for instance the US government never tried to segregate the races with housing policy and ask ourselves whether we expect the society would have been better or worse. We can do the same with all the present institutions. Are you saying that if they had not segregated the races, the meiroy equivalent, living in the counterfactual world would not have been able to live a life like yours? So do you support all the past institutions? Slavery? Internment Camps? The Draft? Landed Aristocracy? The Inquisition? The crusades? And do you simultaneously believe that our elimination of these institutions was also a good thing? I'm guessing you must also believe this since you believe you were supported by everything past and existing.

 

So exactly how do you determine when to keep them and when to remove them? I'm assuming you live in the US...I'm curious as to how you are alive. Your existence is completely supported by everything government does...so when the government shuts down any of these institutions...well you should not exist then right? The government has shutdown in the US and in most countries there have been strikes of teachers unions which shuts down the government provided schools. Did your existence end when this happened since every aspect of your existence is supported by all government past and present.

 

Am I communicating with you from beyond the grave? Are you a ghost? What is the physics of this...are you in quantum entangled state with all governments past and present or does information about government institutions casually impact you based on information travelling at the speed of light? When a government employee lose their job does your hand fade out like in Back to the Future:

tenor.gif?itemid=10387204

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen anyone so far provide a substantial argument against what I'm saying.

In the year 1800 the entire global population was 900M.

Today there is a substantial amount more.

 

Or, go the opposite direction. Why not the 18th century? You could argue the 19th century is a direct result of the Enlightenment, the intense migration of people to the New World. And the discoveries and inventions of the 17th century paved the way for the Industrial revolution: the steam engine and steamboat, refining of steel, machines for food and clothing production.

 

I mean it sounds like you just picked a century which suits your argument.

 

I would argue that human society adapts to its environment, and our environment is vastly different vs. 200 or 300 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks"

Got any proof of that? Are you a gov't worker by chance?  ;D ;D ;D

 

The government is a collaborative effort to represent all citizens with a democratic method of decision making, and is ultimately responsible to those citizens. No private enterprise can come close to that claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

 

So, people in government are just...

 

irrational, normal human beings.

 

While in the private sector, people are...

 

highly efficient, rational, fair and just, robot overlords and unlike those in government are not motivated by things such as religion, biases, greed, and fear etc.

 

Did I get it right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

 

So, people in government are just...

 

irrational, normal human beings.

 

While in the private sector, people are...

 

highly efficient, rational, fair and just, robot overlords and unlike those in government are not motivated by things such as religion, biases, greed, and fear etc.

 

Did I get it right?

 

In the private sector, you perform or you get the ax, whether an employee, or a company with a product. If the product sucks, people stop buying it. When you work for the government, there is none of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

 

So, people in government are just...

 

irrational, normal human beings.

 

While in the private sector, people are...

 

highly efficient, rational, fair and just, robot overlords and unlike those in government are not motivated by things such as religion, biases, greed, and fear etc.

 

Did I get it right?

 

In the private sector, you perform or you get the ax, whether an employee, or a company with a product. If the product sucks, people stock buying it. When you work for the government, there is none of that.

 

So, in addition, now you are saying that there is complete information (i.e. the private sector is strongly efficient).

 

You know this is not true. You know that private companies that suck can stay on for decades. You know that people buy products that suck because people are easily manipulated or simply are unable to make the right judgment. You know that there are liars and cheats out there and psycho CEOs that get away with it.  That it's common.  You can get monopolies in the private sectors and individuals who obtain such market dominance that they simply avoid competition and distort the markets. And of course, you have vested interests outside of the country looking to impact it in various ways that the private sector simply cannot grasp or manage.

 

The private sector is not perfect just like the government is not hell.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

 

So, people in government are just...

 

irrational, normal human beings.

 

While in the private sector, people are...

 

highly efficient, rational, fair and just, robot overlords and unlike those in government are not motivated by things such as religion, biases, greed, and fear etc.

 

Did I get it right?

 

No, people in both places are human beings, not angels.  In the private sector you need to cooperate, persuade, and deal without using violence and anyone can compete with you.  When that happens you have incentives to figure out how to give people what they want cheaper and more efficiently than anyone else. In government violence is seen as legitimate and you have a monopoly on whatever it is you are doing, so the incentives are to force, command, destroy, and when you do decide to try and do something helpful the lack of competition means that people just have to accept whatever it is you offer.  There is no incentive for you to improve your product or service in any way.  It isn't that people are different it is that the incentives the system gives to people are different.  Over the long term markets work, governments don't.  It is the difference between buying and taking, between selling and slavery, between peace and war.  There are two ways people can interact with one another, voluntarily with force only used defensively (the market) or aggressively with force and the threat thereof used as a matter of course (government).  You can persuade people to give you money in exchange for something you give to, or do for, them (market) or you can just take someone's money from them using the threat of violence if they don't hand it over (government).

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see how there is a logical argument for government when:

 

1) the government does not consist of the brightest folks

2) the folks in government do not follow the spirit of the laws nor do they really follow their constituents wishes

3) they consistently put their own interests first

 

This amalgamation of interests and conflicts is quite easily removed if you transfer these responsibilities to private businesses where the transaction is simple. Give me money, I give you your service. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this kind of accountability does not exist in government.

 

So, people in government are just...

 

irrational, normal human beings.

 

While in the private sector, people are...

 

highly efficient, rational, fair and just, robot overlords and unlike those in government are not motivated by things such as religion, biases, greed, and fear etc.

 

Did I get it right?

 

In the private sector, you perform or you get the ax, whether an employee, or a company with a product. If the product sucks, people stock buying it. When you work for the government, there is none of that.

 

So, in addition, now you are saying that there is complete information (i.e. the private sector is strongly efficient).

 

You know this is not true. You know that private companies that suck can stay on for decades. You know that people buy products that suck because people are easily manipulated or simply are unable to make the right judgment. You know that there are liars and cheats out there and psycho CEOs that get away with it.  That it's common.  You can get monopolies in the private sectors and individuals who obtain such market dominance that they simply avoid competition and distort the markets. And of course, you have vested interested outside of the country looking to impact it in various ways that the private secotr simply cannot grasp or manage.

 

The private sector is not perfect just like the government is not hell.

 

Markets are efficient only in the long term.  (Value investors should know this and not need to be told).  More specifically they tend to move towards efficiency over time, while never getting there because conditions are always changing.    Governments, however, are not efficient, ever, and get less so over time.  Long term governments are a disaster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the product sucks, people stock buying it. When you work for the government, there is none of that.

In some cases yes, in some cases no. Take a look at Comcast for example of the latter. If there is no reason for government, why are people in Ft Collins voting for a municipality-provided fiber-optic network build-out? Why is gov't able to price a superior product at 30% less than existing products?

 

It's silly to argue absolutes. Sometimes gov't provides a better option, sometimes private enterprise does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the product sucks, people stock buying it. When you work for the government, there is none of that.

In some cases yes, in some cases no. Take a look at Comcast for example of the latter. If there is no reason for government, why are people in Ft Collins voting for a municipality-provided fiber-optic network build-out? Why is gov't able to price a superior product at 30% less than existing products?

 

It's silly to argue absolutes. Sometimes gov't provides a better option, sometimes private enterprise does.

 

I don't know about Ft Collins, but in my town no one is allowed to compete with Comcast.  If I wanted to start a company to run cable or fiber in my town I would not be able to.    Most, so called "market failure" is really government rules and regulations failure.  A failure of crony-corporatism not capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...