PDA

View Full Version : Has the size of government always been a question here?



CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-07-2011, 07:03 PM
I think it has. I think even during the days of the Founders--post the ratification of the Constitution--the battle over what size the government should was there. You had people like Hamilton, Thomas Paine, Adams and the like, arguing for what could be termed "big" government, while you had the Anti-Federalists like Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Adams and Monroe, arguing for "smaller" government. Ultimately, IMO, our own Constitution was a compromise between what both groups wanted.

I believe our battle now, and for the last over 100 years, is in some ways a continuation of the same battle we've had since the beginning. I think that outside of the radicals on both sides, both Liberals and Conservatives love America, and respect our nation's principles--our main disagreement is what role the government, both state and federal, should play in our lives; what areas it should be a part of; Where it should regulate, if it at all; And then we have more "recent" issues--the century long struggle over labor vs. business; business vs. regulation; regulation vs. oversight.

I believe a balanced solution can be and should be found for all these issues. Partisans will not like it compromise, neither; Ideological extremists on both side, but a balance can be struck, and should for the good of the country, between the needs of the corporation and the rights of the worker; between total Laissez-Faire government, and the strangling, overregulation of certain industries; A balance can be struck between no welfare state, and an inefficient welfare state; On many other issues, if we just think logically and stop calling each other names--"Nazi", "Communist", "Heartless Conservative", "Anti-American Liberal", etc--we can actually get things done which are good for America, which will ensure that our children grow up in a strong, prosperous, respected and safe America; An America with a strong national defense that also takes care of it's citizenry.

Too often politics is like a bad soap opera, or like wrestling. We have two men of opposite party stand on stage, say bad things about each other, and then go backstage and shake hands on a deal that only benefits themselves and not all of America. That is politics as usual, and has been for the longest time.

But I believe with the virtues of ration and reason, we can change that and throw away the rhetoric and soundbite politics, and we can elect leaders who will speak honestly, plainly and openly to the American people; I believe we can change the system where we're not simply voting against someone, but for someone--Most politicians, too often, simply run a campaign against their opponent, and not a campaign FOR America, and then govern opposite from what they promised once in office, and I believe if we want America to continue as the leader of the world, to continue being the greatest and most powerful nation on Earth, then we must change this.

Rockntractor
04-07-2011, 07:48 PM
Federal government should fit into a medium sized strip mall.

fettpett
04-07-2011, 08:33 PM
Federal government should fit into a medium sized strip mall.

cracker jack box would work too :D

Gingersnap
04-07-2011, 08:35 PM
But I believe with the virtues of ration and reason, we can change that and throw away the rhetoric and soundbite politics, and we can elect leaders who will speak honestly, plainly and openly to the American people; I believe we can change the system where we're not simply voting against someone, but for someone--Most politicians, too often, simply run a campaign against their opponent, and not a campaign FOR America, and then govern opposite from what they promised once in office, and I believe if we want America to continue as the leader of the world, to continue being the greatest and most powerful nation on Earth, then we must change this.

To change it we have to do two things:

Decide on what "America" means as a culture and;

Stop voting with our hearts and use our minds.


Paradoxically enough, the release of initiative and enterprise made possible by popular self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again after freedom has brought opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent, the incompetent and the unfortunate grow envious and covetous, and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the Golden Calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.

At the stage between apathy and dependency, men always turn in fear to economic and political panaceas. New conditions, it is claimed, require new remedies. Under such circumstances, the competent citizen is certainly not a fool if he insists upon using the compass of history when forced to sail uncharted seas. Usually so-called new remedies are not new at all. Compulsory planned economy, for example, was tried by the Chinese some three milleniums ago, and by the Romans in the early centuries of the Christian era. It was applied in Germany, Italy and Russia long before the present war broke out. Yet it is being seriously advocated today as a solution of our economic problems in the United States. Its proponents confidently assert that government can successfully plan and control all major business activity in the nation, and still not interfere with our political freedom and our hard-won civil and religious liberties. The lessons of history all point in exactly the reverse direction. - Henning W. Prentis, Industrial Management in a Republic, p. 22

Gingersnap
04-07-2011, 09:52 PM
Bumping.

NJCardFan
04-07-2011, 10:47 PM
It's not just the size but the scope. The federal government is into EVERYTHING. There isn't one aspect of our daily lives that the government doesn't have their grubby little paws in.

Gingersnap
04-07-2011, 10:51 PM
I remember when the Democrats were frightened of government in the bedroom. Now government is in your personal fatness and your lighting options.

NJCardFan
04-07-2011, 10:52 PM
I remember when the Democrats were frightened of government in the bedroom. Now government is in your personal fatness and your lighting options.

And care to tell us which side is responsible for that?