Big Government... was it worth it?

[kres24GT]

As we watch the end of American civilization as we know it, was it worth it to give so many of our freedoms and responsibilities over to government, only for them to sell us out to the highest bidder?

I was never a fan of big government, but most of you were, have to wonder, was it worth it?

[playboydojo]

If they "sell us out to the highest bidder," wouldn't that mean they privitized? I don't want government to be vanguard of my freedom, nor do I want business to do so. Both models have proved to be abject failures.

But I am interested in what litmus you're using to measure the size of our government. Because one of our biggest government programs (THE biggest, compared to the rest of the world) would be the military.

[kres24GT]

If they "sell us out to the highest bidder," wouldn't that mean they privitized? I don't want government to be vanguard of my freedom, nor do I want business to do so. Both models have proved to be abject failures.

But I am interested in what litmus you're using to measure the size of our government. Because one of our biggest government programs (THE biggest, compared to the rest of the world) would be the military.


The military, like all government programs is a bloated government entity that better serves corporate interests than it does the men and women who give their lives for it.

Unfortunately we cannot do away with the military.

Anyway this isn't as much about spending as it is about giving your freedoms over to government in exchange for safety and comfort, only for the politcians to abuse the pwoer you gave them.

Pretty much all of our problems right now are becuase we gave the politcians too much power, to much influence over our lives. We decided that making decisions for ourselves, saving for our own retirement, saving money for hard times by ourselves, making our own informed consumer choices were too difficult, we'd prefer government do it for us. Oh and we let them educate us turning most of us into mindless government sheep.

It was all so we could spend a little more time and money on doing what we want to.

Now the time has come to pay the price and we won't like it. Was it worth it?

[playboydojo]

You seem to have an odd view of history, or at least the history of these policies. For example you cite our disinterest in "saving for our own retirement" or "hard times" but forget that there wasn't money to save. Those programs were mostly supported by socialist laborers of the late nineteenth/early eighteenth centuries who didn't HAVE the money to save. These laborers hardly ever retired--if they made it to such an age, hopefully they had enough kids still alive to support them. That was the retirement plan. And despite the noise made by business before the New Deal, they were all too happy to water down these socialist programs and use them to their own ends because productivity is totally pointless if consumers can't afford to...y'know...consume. It wasn't about laziness but about saving the market.

And your comment about "making...informed consumer choices" I suppose is a reference to inspections and standards? Business supported that. One example would be the USDA, because Europe had totally blocked US beef because of the suspect quality of some producers. When one corporation acts out of line, consumer faith in the whoe industry falls. The entire industry would have been destroyed by (justified)European protectionism if the federal government hadn't stepped in and began establishing standards.

And on the consumer side, it would be ludicrous to expect consumers to investigate the practices of every single corporations--disingenuous as they all are. There is too much information about any one subject for people to make informed decisions about much--that is why pundits have become so popular in US where the news is "objective" and largely devoid of context.

In the interests of maintaining the rotten edifice that is our disparate economy, we have to make strange decisions or face another crises of overproduction. Personally, I'd prefer to destroy our form of market, but I doubt that will happen in my lifetime.

[kres24GT]

You seem to have an odd view of history, or at least the history of these policies. For example you cite our disinterest in "saving for our own retirement" or "hard times" but forget that there wasn't money to save. Those programs were mostly supported by socialist laborers of the late nineteenth/early eighteenth centuries who didn't HAVE the money to save. These laborers hardly ever retired--if they made it to such an age, hopefully they had enough kids still alive to support them. That was the retirement plan. And despite the noise made by business before the New Deal, they were all too happy to water down these socialist programs and use them to their own ends because productivity is totally pointless if consumers can't afford to...y'know...consume. It wasn't about laziness but about saving the market.

And your comment about "making...informed consumer choices" I suppose is a reference to inspections and standards? Business supported that. One example would be the USDA, because Europe had totally blocked US beef because of the suspect quality of some producers. When one corporation acts out of line, consumer faith in the whoe industry falls. The entire industry would have been destroyed by (justified)European protectionism if the federal government hadn't stepped in and began establishing standards.

And on the consumer side, it would be ludicrous to expect consumers to investigate the practices of every single corporations--disingenuous as they all are. There is too much information about any one subject for people to make informed decisions about much--that is why pundits have become so popular in US where the news is "objective" and largely devoid of context.

In the interests of maintaining the rotten edifice that is our disparate economy, we have to make strange decisions or face another crises of overproduction. Personally, I'd prefer to destroy our form of market, but I doubt that will happen in my lifetime.


So you answer is yes, it was worth it.


FYI, I know business supports regulation, they love it in fact, its good business for them.

[playboydojo]

To say "yes it was worth it." would be too simple, IMO. Throughout history we constantly errect institutions that are necessary for their time, but then as they become less so, they grow more deleterious to our freedoms and we overthow it only to replace it with a new chains. At one point, the slave-state was probably economically necessary but as it became less so, people began to realize how unacceptable it was until it became necessary to destory it. Powerful militaristic kingdoms and empires followed the same path. The institution of organized religion became most relevant in Europe when State and economic institutions had crumbled to dust and the Church was probably completely necessary but now the Pope is more like the Emporer of Japan.

At the time, New Deal reforms were necessary, but our economic situation changed drastically after WWII. It is possible that it could be a hinderance, and we will replace it with something else. To question whether it was "worth it" is odd--without slavery and genocide, I wouldn't be here, but was it worth it? It's not quite the kind of thing we should quantify, I don't think.

[kres24GT]

To say "yes it was worth it." would be too simple, IMO. Throughout history we constantly errect institutions that are necessary for their time, but then as they become less so, they grow more deleterious to our freedoms and we overthow it only to replace it with a new chains. At one point, the slave-state was probably economically necessary but as it became less so, people began to realize how unacceptable it was until it became necessary to destory it. Powerful militaristic kingdoms and empires followed the same path. The institution of organized religion became most relevant in Europe when State and economic institutions had crumbled to dust and the Church was probably completely necessary but now the Pope is more like the Emporer of Japan.

At the time, New Deal reforms were necessary, but our economic situation changed drastically after WWII. It is possible that it could be a hinderance, and we will replace it with something else. To question whether it was "worth it" is odd--without slavery and genocide, I wouldn't be here, but was it worth it? It's not quite the kind of thing we should quantify, I don't think.


Government brainwashing at its best.

[bairdi]

As we watch the end of American civilization as we know it, was it worth it to give so many of our freedoms and responsibilities over to government, only for them to sell us out to the highest bidder?

I was never a fan of big government, but most of you were, have to wonder, was it worth it?
Government shouldn't be a them and us thing....at least not in this country. Somewhere along the line, our government no longer became a government "of, by and for" the people but has become hijacked by corporate America for benefit of the wealthiest among us. Big government is not the problem. A government that is unresponsive to the will and consent of the governed is the problem imho.

[disrupter]

size doesn't matter,
it is what you do with what you've got that matters.

just ask any satisfied customer, ;) LOL

[kres24GT]

Government shouldn't be a them and us thing....at least not in this country. Somewhere along the line, our government no longer became a government "of, by and for" the people but has become hijacked by corporate America for benefit of the wealthiest among us. Big government is not the problem. A government that is unresponsive to the will and consent of the governed is the problem imho.

Sorry, but it is us vs. them, they make it is us vs. us though. They distract us with nonsense while they sell us out to the wealthy.

The two party system causes us to sit here and call each other "filthy liberals" or "hater dogs" blaming all the problems on the other side while they do the same things over and over again, selling us out to the wealthy.

It most certainly is us vs them and the bigger government gets the more it benefits the rich who own the politcians.

[playboydojo]

Wow, I'm brainwashed by the government? That would be poetic justice, considering I'm actually an anarchist, politically. I just thought that I wasn't willing to leap to huge conlcusions, especially without a clear understanding of the context. Silly me, tool of the government. Just for the record, on which point, exactly, was I so incorrect?

[bairdi]

Sorry, but it is us vs. them, they make it is us vs. us though. They distract us with nonsense while they sell us out to the wealthy.

The two party system causes us to sit here and call each other "filthy liberals" or "hater dogs" blaming all the problems on the other side while they do the same things over and over again, selling us out to the wealthy.

It most certainly is us vs them and the bigger government gets the more it benefits the rich who own the politcians.
I wasn't disagreeing that it is a us vs. them situation today. There is no doubt that this government has been hijacked. I was saying it should not be this way. I would be perfectly ok with having a zero party system where any individual who wanted to run for president could run without being confined to a certain set of principles. The sooner we take back our government, the better.

[Bill]

The sooner we take back our government, the better.

The question and problem is, how to do it.

They are not just going to give up power.

And they have effectively complete control over the critical systems and infrastructure.

[Frankg]

As we watch the end of American civilization as we know it, was it worth it to give so many of our freedoms and responsibilities over to government, only for them to sell us out to the highest bidder?

I was never a fan of big government, but most of you were, have to wonder, was it worth it?
I didn't give any freedoms away to the government.

[kres24GT]

The question and problem is, how to do it.

They are not just going to give up power.

And they have effectively complete control over the critical systems and infrastructure.

Vote for as many different parties as possible. As long as only the two big government, pro wealthy, pro corporations Dems and Reps have total control, it will never happen. Having multiple parties from multiple politcal beleifs will limit power. Two parties can agree to fuck us over, multiple parties will never agree.