Political Question: Big Gov't or Little Gov't??

[forHISglory]

I really enjoy reading the political opinions of the Villagers; we get so intense, don't we?!? Well, here is a different sort of political question. This one won't name names of candidates or parties, but I really believe that it comes to the heart of our political beliefs and our votes.

Basically, do you believe in big government or little government? To what extent should the government take care of its citizens? To what extent should citizens take care of themselves? Should government protect us against ourselves? Who is ultimately responsible for ourselves and our family?

Should the government mandate wealth sharing? Or should government keep their hands off the wealth? Is it fair that the wealthy have more? Is it fair that the poor suffer and have trouble moving up the economic ladder?

What should the role of government be, whether local, state or federal? Is a big government too intrusive into personal affairs? Is little government too uncaring? What do you expect government to regulate?

Other thoughts concerning the scope of government as it affects private citizens?

Again, I'd rather not see this thread turn into political advertising for either candidate or party. Thanks!

[forHISglory]

Here's some more food for thought on this question:

How far should government go into a private citizen's health life? Marital life? Economic life? Educational life? Religious life? Family life? Career? Safety?

Do both a big government and a smaller, limited government carry their own set of problems? Would it better to have a middle sized government?

Here's my personal take, for what it's worth:
I'd like to see government be small to middle sized. I'd like to see our federal government regulate transportation and interstate commerce so that these things stay uniform and even from state to state. I want the government to protect us from foreign enemies. I want the government to issue a uniform money for our nation. I want the government to insure safety standards for what I eat and drink and what I wear and what I drive, etc.

But I also think that I need to take more responsibility in several areas. For example, a street in our community had litter all over. Citizens complained that the city didn't clean it up. But what is wrong with individual citizens cleaning it up? Why do I have to rely on government to do this? I'm ashamed to say that I did not help to clean up that particular road. However, I did work on cleaning the road that I live on. There's many more examples of how we as citizens have come to depend on government to do things that we should be able to handle.

I have been pondering this question for some time, and will continue to weigh in as I formulate my thoughts. Mean while, what do you think?

[monkeywrangler71]

Are you gathering opinions to prepare for a class discussion, or just making conversation? If you need it for class, I'll pm you my answers.

[Greebo]

I really enjoy reading the political opinions of the Villagers; we get so intense, don't we?!? Well, here is a different sort of political question. This one won't name names of candidates or parties, but I really believe that it comes to the heart of our political beliefs and our votes.

Basically, do you believe in big government or little government? To what extent should the government take care of its citizens? To what extent should citizens take care of themselves? Should government protect us against ourselves? Who is ultimately responsible for ourselves and our family?

As little as possible, not at all, completely, no, and each individual is responsible for him or herself. When an individual is born who cannot be responsible for him or herself, the parents by default retain that responsibility for life.

Should the government mandate wealth sharing? Or should government keep their hands off the wealth? Is it fair that the wealthy have more? Is it fair that the poor suffer and have trouble moving up the economic ladder?

No, yes, yes, and the latter question is based on a false premise. One can be poor and move up the economic ladder very quickly. Starting wealth is not a limiting factor in the ability to produce wealth.

What should the role of government be, whether local, state or federal? Is a big government too intrusive into personal affairs? Is little government too uncaring? What do you expect government to regulate?

The role of the GOvernment should be to protect and preserve individual rights. Yes. Its not Government's job to care. Regulation is not necessary, criminal prosecution of those who cause deliberate harm and civil resolutions between parties is all that is needed.

[quote]Other thoughts concerning the scope of government as it affects private citizens?
The scope of Government should be extremely limited. There should be no collusion between business and government, no power of government to interfere in the market, no ability of business to curry favors from government to gain advantages they are not otherwise able to attain through talent.

The reason for all of my answers above is simple. There is no group that is not first made up of individuals, and no group, no matter how large, has any right to do to an individual what a single individual has no right to do. When Government secures anything for an individual or a company, it does so at the expense of other individuals. When Government regulates, it restricts free trade. When it sets controls in the market, it creates advantages for companies that could not get them otherwise.

Of course, we've got communal thinking so ingrained in this culture, that its second nature for people to think, "The Government should do something" - so there's no chance in hell of any of the above ideals occurring within this century...

[forHISglory]

Hi Monkeywrangler! I'm not preparing for a class. Just was thinking about this and decided to ask you all what you thought. I keep trying to make sense out of politics and it began to seem to me that most political philosophy boiled down to big government vs. small government. Keep in mind that I have never studied political science, so I may be way way off on this. I have come to appreciate the thoughts and views of the Village, and just was wondering.

[Luv2BeFrugal]

As little as possible, not at all, completely, no, and each individual is responsible for him or herself. When an individual is born who cannot be responsible for him or herself, the parents by default retain that responsibility for life.


No, yes, yes, and the latter question is based on a false premise. One can be poor and move up the economic ladder very quickly. Starting wealth is not a limiting factor in the ability to produce wealth.


The role of the GOvernment should be to protect and preserve individual rights. Yes. Its not Government's job to care. Regulation is not necessary, criminal prosecution of those who cause deliberate harm and civil resolutions between parties is all that is needed.

Other thoughts concerning the scope of government as it affects private citizens?[/COLOR]
The scope of Government should be extremely limited. There should be no collusion between business and government, no power of government to interfere in the market, no ability of business to curry favors from government to gain advantages they are not otherwise able to attain through talent.

The reason for all of my answers above is simple. There is no group that is not first made up of individuals, and no group, no matter how large, has any right to do to an individual what a single individual has no right to do. When Government secures anything for an individual or a company, it does so at the expense of other individuals. When Government regulates, it restricts free trade. When it sets controls in the market, it creates advantages for companies that could not get them otherwise.

Of course, we've got communal thinking so ingrained in this culture, that its second nature for people to think, "The Government should do something" - so there's no chance in hell of any of the above ideals occurring within this century...

Perfectly said... I agree 100%!! Get rid of BIG government!! Let's all be responsible for ourselves!!

[elphie]

On seperate occasions Thomas Jefferson said that the purpose of government was:
-to do for the people that which they could not do for themselves.
-to protect people from each other but not from themselves.

Sometimes this calls for regulation, sometimes for deregulation. My belief is that no one answer is ever always the right answer, we must be willing to look at a problem from all angles, gather as much information as possible and then make an informed decision about that particular problem.

For example, taxing those in a higher tax bracket, I don't believe that should automatically be true but if a CEO is earning millions at the expense of providing health care for lowest level employees then who do those minimum wage workers have to turn to but the government? The government must step in and do for them what they can't do for themselves. And if the government must provide healthcare because the employer refuses to then who should pay for that? This is why tax credits and breaks should be given to corporations who provide healthcare, they are already doing their part.

On the other hand I don't feel it is the responsibility of a higher tax bracket to support those who CHOOSE not to work at all. There is a difference between someone accepting help to get by and someone who expects the help to always be there. This is an example of a time it is not the government's responsibility to protect people from themselves.

[Denvergirlie]

I'd like to see a MUCH smaller government. I'd like to see a government the size called for in the consistution. I'd like to see everything not provided for in the consitution elminated immediately. If the PEOPLE want other these other things like environmental laws and education standards, then admend the consitution and change it, but the influence the government has these days is completely out of control and is esstentially illegal.

Personal responsibilty needs to come back. Sense of community needs to come back. People need to learn how to take care of themselves.

[forHISglory]

As I continue to think on this situation......

Perhaps state and local governments should carry more responsibility and not rely on the federal government to do this. An example that a poster said was education. Let states set standards on their own, and also work out funding on their own. Seems like politicians on the state and local level have much more contact with and interaction with the citizens, and respond more to local concerns. That would mean the state and local levels get larger, even while the federal level gets smaller.

What about welfare? Should this be totally state/local run? Should private institutions such as churches and charities step up to the plate more?

Issue of safety: I am all for seat belts, helmets, and air bags. But is it the function of the government to make me wear and use these? I'll use them, even if it is not the law. But I wonder about government's determination to protect me against my own stupidity. On the other hand, what about the children in cars? Should they be protected against the parent's stupidity? Is it the function of government to stand in the gap for them and mandate safety seats, etc? And there is the aspect of insurance and costs passed on to the average citizen. What will it cost me if folks are injured in accidents and were not using protective devices? I know that costs are passed on to us.

Dear Villagers, I ask a lot of questions and I do not know the answers to most of them. Thanks for helping me think thru this!!

[Gardengal18]

Little Gov.

Unless your elderly or have some sort of severe debilitation the Government shouldn't be your "Nanny". People need to start being responsible for themselves and their actions. I started at the bottom too at one time but I took courses got experience and I still have a ways to go yet. But this constant sitting on ones behind (when there is absolutely nothing wrong with the individual) with their hand out all the time needs to end. I'm getting real tired of paying for them. Charity can only go so far. God helps those who help themselves.

[tmffv]

Little Federal Government, little to medium state/local government. Perhaps then more people would vote on their local representatives and actually get to see the results more directly. Too many people have the attitude that their vote doesn't make a difference so they don't bother.

[Persimmon Lace]

I want the government to stay out of my business. So I am for the smallest possible government possible.

I do not want mine or anyone else's wealth redistributed.

The primary purpose of the Government as it was set up by the founding fathers is to protect the people from those who would destroy the democracy or attack us from within or from the outside. It was not set up to take care of us from cradle to grave. That's what we are supposed to do, take care of ourselves but now we are overtaxed and overburdened by an intrusive, know it all government that believes we need to be protected from ourselves.

[forHISglory]

More random thoughts on government:

Do any of you know what has happened historically when nations developed too big of a government? (No, I don't know the answer; just asking).

If our nation decided to swing the pendulum and go for a smaller federal government, could it be accomplished? Would it incite civil war? How long would it take to get the government whittled down to size?

Hmmmm.......