• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Less Government vs. Better Government

Less Government or Better Government?


  • Total voters
    57
Very serious accusations .
I'd love to hear from government employees to hear their side of this issue.
My opinion - considering the quality of our people, I think our government is OK...but, as with private business, it can be better..
Suggestions ?
Listen to the people, but, listen carefully.
IMO, polls are male bovine feces, unless conducted properly and fairly...
I suspect too many people here "hate" government and cannot argue sensibly.
Those who base their understanding of government on revisionist history have a poor understanding of the true intent of our government's purpose/function. It allows them to stand for nothing and fall for anything. It allows them to create big over-regulating bureaucracies on what amounts to emotion instead of logic. Every bureaucracy Progressives have built in the last 100 years today are failures in that they can no longer be sustained. When a citizen is burdened/forced to hire someone to prepare their taxes because the tax code has become so complicated the system is a failure. When one of the biggest budget busters is paying for all the bureaucrats wages, benefits, bonuses and pension funds due to the size of these bureaucracies, the system is seriously flawed. When taxpayers are continuously left on the hook for increased funding to these bureaucracies in the billions of dollars to keep them afloat and no matter how much money is thrown at them, they never improve in efficiency, the writing is on the wall. I truly don't understand the mindset that thinks more government is better government. How they can put their faith in it with such a miserable record is beyond me. Maybe it's because they just don't have any faith in themselves.
 
I truly don't understand the mindset that thinks more government is better government. How they can put their faith in it with such a miserable record is beyond me. Maybe it's because they just don't have any faith in themselves.

If government fails, its because people fail. It's amazing how many conservatives say that government sucks and can't solve problems... then elect people whose MISSION it is to prevent government from functioning.
 
If government fails, its because people fail. It's amazing how many conservatives say that government sucks and can't solve problems... then elect people whose MISSION it is to prevent government from functioning.

The reason government isn't functioning effectively/efficiently isn't because of conservatives but because of feckless policies that have been implemented and were doomed to fail from the beginning.
 
The reason government isn't functioning effectively/efficiently isn't because of conservatives but because of feckless policies that have been implemented and were doomed to fail from the beginning.

How does electing government saboteurs solve anything?
 
How does electing government saboteurs solve anything?
LOL so now anyone who wishes to scale back the size of government is a saboteur? By scaling back the size and scope of government, it would cut waste, help eliminate fraud, and reel in over-reach of federal power. Because government has grown so big not even the legislatures can keep track of funding for certain programs often double/triple dipping funding the same program under another name. It's absurd
 
If government fails, its because people fail. It's amazing how many conservatives say that government sucks and can't solve problems... then elect people whose MISSION it is to prevent government from functioning.

The reason government isn't functioning effectively/efficiently isn't because of conservatives but because of feckless policies that have been implemented and were doomed to fail from the beginning.

Indeed, it seems to be a defining characteristic of statists and leftists that they put forth policies that anyone with any sense ought to realize will fail, and then try to blame their opposition for the results of this failure. They'll never take responsibility for the consequences of their own policies.
 
Indeed, it seems to be a defining characteristic of statists and leftists that they put forth policies that anyone with any sense ought to realize will fail, and then try to blame their opposition for the results of this failure. They'll never take responsibility for the consequences of their own policies.

Personal responsibility seems to be something the left is not keen on. Without it, it allows them more room to further their mission to create new victims so they can justify funding for a new program designed for them which gives them the opportunity to expand government control through more regulations in its implementation.
 
None of your twisting will make your point for you. Neither will your personal attacks on other members. But that's your way isn't, that's precisely what your known for on this site, and why no one takes you seriously.
LOL..."twisting". It is your (and your brethren) argument that is twisting in the wind. It is absurdity to argue that that the role of govt is to not maximize the each citizen's life or that citizens do not want this.

Don't be upset with me, it it is you who put your argument where it is.
 
LOL so now anyone who wishes to scale back the size of government is a saboteur?

No, I'm referring specifically to people who platform on being obstructionists, and who cheer when the government breaks.

By scaling back the size and scope of government, it would cut waste, help eliminate fraud, and reel in over-reach of federal power. Because government has grown so big not even the legislatures can keep track of funding for certain programs often double/triple dipping funding the same program under another name. It's absurd

I'm not against reducing government waste.
 
Lives longer is not subjective, but objective. It's a straight number of years. Easily measured. What is the measurement of "better"? There is no set measurement because it's a subjective value.

Are you still clinging to the argument that the measurement of a better life is impossible? That the quality of a life, the wealth, health, satisfaction.....happiness in life....cannot be measured?

FFS, what is wrong with you folks?

Next up, we cannot criticize govt policy or POTUS's......because we cannot measure whether or not those policies have an effect on people or their lives!
 
Personal responsibility seems to be something the left is not keen on. Without it, it allows them more room to further their mission to create new victims so they can justify funding for a new program designed for them which gives them the opportunity to expand government control through more regulations in its implementation.
It is so sad seeing a person who lives their life in the belief that those arguing for the betterment of man, that have objective measurement that certain policies DO in fact lead to better outcomes for all, holds to a conspiracy theory that instead it is a plan for totalitarianism.

It is very sad. Some who hold to your view blow up federal buildings.
 
Indeed, it seems to be a defining characteristic of statists and leftists that they put forth policies that anyone with any sense ought to realize will fail, and then try to blame their opposition for the results of this failure. They'll never take responsibility for the consequences of their own policies.
This is coming from the guy who agrees with those stating that we cannot objectively measure whether policy can produce a better outcome........so how can you claim there is a problem to take responsibility for?
 
LOL..."twisting". It is your (and your brethren) argument that is twisting in the wind. It is absurdity to argue that that the role of govt is to not maximize the each citizen's life or that citizens do not want this.

Don't be upset with me, it it is you who put your argument where it is.

It's up to each citizen to maximize their life, not the govt.
 
Please share with me how this debt we now carry is going to be addressed when the number of people who are actually working and paying taxes is shrinking?
LOL....She thinks the aggregate number of working age adults.....is shrinking!

No more bus drivers!

Next up, is this proof of a failing education system....or the failure of a student?
 
It's up to each citizen to maximize their life, not the govt.
The questions is whether govt is formed to cause a better outcomes....or not.

You still have not absorbed the original point, it has not sunk in....or you are still in denial of the pretext in the context.
 
The questions is whether govt is formed to cause a better outcomes....or not.

You still have not absorbed the original point, it has not sunk in....or you are still in denial of the pretext in the context.

Put very simply, the govt is formed to allow a smooth operation of society, not your fairy godmother.
 
The questions is whether govt is formed to cause a better outcomes....or not.

You still have not absorbed the original point, it has not sunk in....or you are still in denial of the pretext in the context.

Government is formed to protect their citizens, while governmental rules are put in place such that government doesn't intrude into the lives of it's people. Where these rules (read: Constitution) do not exist or are ignored there is lots of death, lots of suffering which stems from the idea that "government knows best" all wrapped up in a good intentions bow.
 
LOL...what stupid response, how in the f#ck is maximizing well being of citizens "worse"?

Worse than what?

why do you think there are socialists, fascists, communists vs Libertarians, moderates, etc.

you think a socialist welfare state helps people

I don't think it does
 
Government is formed to protect their citizens,
Exactly, and that is the point, there is not one form of protection.
while governmental rules are put in place such that government doesn't intrude into the lives of it's people.
"Intrusion" is your wiggle word, lets see where you take it.
Where these rules (read: Constitution) do not exist or are ignored there is lots of death, lots of suffering which stems from the idea that "government knows best" all wrapped up in a good intentions bow.
Wow, that is some conflicting confusion there! Where rules do not exist, there is death.....which therefore is proof......that when rules do not exist.....it is an example.....that "government knows best"!

And I did not have to give you any rope, you brought it yourself.
 
why do you think there are socialists, fascists, communists vs Libertarians, moderates, etc.

you think a socialist welfare state helps people

I don't think it does
You are giving examples of differing poli-sci ideologies, each claiming to be a better way......and you make a value judgement on " socialist welfare state".......after previously stating....."we cannot objectively measure what is a better form of government".

Your complete and utter hypocrisy is ignored!

FFS!

YALE!!!!
 
Last edited:
Put very simply, the govt is formed to allow a smooth operation of society, not your fairy godmother.

Wait....are you claiming that this can be objectively measured.....this "smooth operation"?
 
Exactly, and that is the point, there is not one form of protection.
The Constitution in the US protects it's citizens by providing for a standing army or militia. That's protection. What protection are you talking about - perhaps protecting people from themselves by banning and regulating what and how people should live their lives by a government edict?

"Intrusion" is your wiggle word, lets see where you take it.
The Federalist Papers can provide you some more background on intrusion.

Wow, that is some conflicting confusion there!
To leftists perhaps.

Where rules do not exist, there is death.....which therefore is proof......that when rules do not exist.....it is an example.....that "government knows best"!
History is littered with examples, which you apparently either ignore or are unaware.

And I did not have to give you any rope, you brought it yourself.
:lamo Perhaps if you put together a few coherent statements you could make a claim. All I see is nonsense. Care to try again?
 
History is littered with examples, which you apparently either ignore or are unaware.
Your argument is so confused, so out of touch with the context of the argument.

The argument at hand is whether or not the effectiveness of govt can be measured.

Try actually addressing the context.
 
Last edited:
You argument is so confused, so out of touch with the context of the argument.

The argument at hand is whether or not the effectiveness of govt can be measured.

Try actually addressing the context.

Sure it can. I believe the greatest struggle you'd have is defining 'effectiveness.' The measurement of effectiveness is going to probably end up being driven by what people (or the government itself) considers as the role/goal of government. Fat chance you can get people to agree on that.

With regards to the "less or better" question, I think that it is much easier for us to agree on what "less" government looks like than it is to come to a consensus on what "better" government is.
 
Last edited:
It is so sad seeing a person who lives their life in the belief that those arguing for the betterment of man, that have objective measurement that certain policies DO in fact lead to better outcomes for all, holds to a conspiracy theory that instead it is a plan for totalitarianism.

It is very sad. Some who hold to your view blow up federal buildings.

OMG I can't believe you posted that garbage. There is nothing that brings the "betterment of man" than to teach him to be responsible for his own choices in life and to allow him to pay the consequences for them. In doing so he learns. To not allow a man that life lesson destroys him.
 
Back
Top Bottom