So much for small government.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...te-gridlocked-over-confederate-monuments-bill

I always get a kick out of Republicans who claim smaller government is better, and that we should leave more decisions up to local people. In theory it sounds like a lovely idea, but virtually every time Republicans argue for it they are arguing it because they assume it's easier for racists, religious zealots, and corporations to gain total control over a smaller local government and impose horrible rules that harm minorities and create competitive races to the bottom that hurt workers. The whole reason why we need larger forms of government is to protect against this exact thing.

But now it seems that the state of Alabama had decided that it's local towns and cities should have less power to decide what happens in them. And why? Because they're afraid some of their cities might not be racist enough anymore. They want to force locals to stare at confederate statues even if every single solitary person in town is sick and tired of them.

So taking down the memorials polls at 100%?

MrWonka said:

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...te-gridlocked-over-confederate-monuments-bill

I always get a kick out of Republicans who claim smaller government is better, and that we should leave more decisions up to local people. In theory it sounds like a lovely idea, but virtually every time Republicans argue for it they are arguing it because they assume it's easier for racists, religious zealots, and corporations to gain total control over a smaller local government and impose horrible rules that harm minorities and create competitive races to the bottom that hurt workers. The whole reason why we need larger forms of government is to protect against this exact thing.

But now it seems that the state of Alabama had decided that it's local towns and cities should have less power to decide what happens in them. And why? Because they're afraid some of their cities might not be racist enough anymore. They want to force locals to stare at confederate statues even if every single solitary person in town is sick and tired of them.

Click to expand...

You assume that small government people want it so they can prohibit other races and religions from existing. Lmao.

Actually, I can see how it would seem this way. The fact of the matter is that, in a free market, the most intelligent will often times do the best. Seeing as the average IQ of the minorities I assume your speaking of (Mexicans & Blacks specifically) is quite a bit lower than that of say, Asians or Whites, it looks like they under perform due to "oppression" which would NOT be the case.

That aside, the fact that you believe politicians and "the state" can make better decisions than you or I really shows me that you don't hold your own ability to make decisions in high esteem.

Henrin said:

So taking down the memorials polls at 100%?

Click to expand...

If it did, this law would still ban a city from taking them down.

MrWonka said:

If it did, this law would still ban a city from taking them down.

Click to expand...

In Alabama? You might get near those poll results in New York, California or Massachusetts to take down the monuments in Alabama, but you won't get anywhere near those kind of numbers in Alabama itself.

Koke said:

That aside, the fact that you believe politicians and "the state" can make better decisions than you or I really shows me that you don't hold your own ability to make decisions in high esteem.

Click to expand...

It's called a Nash Equilibrium. You should educate yourself on it sometime.

Nash Equilibrium

"Even though mutual cooperation leads to a better outcome, if one prisoner chooses mutual cooperation and the other does not, one prisoner's outcome is worse."

It's not about who can make better decisions, it's about understanding that you can't make the best decision on your own. Without cooperation the best decision you can make often still ends up screwing you.

Henrin said:

In Alabama? You might get near those poll results in New York, California or Massachusetts to take down the monuments in Alabama, but you won't get anywhere near those kind of numbers in Alabama itself.

Click to expand...

Well then why is the state so afraid of it happening?

MrWonka said:

It's called a Nash Equilibrium. You should educate yourself on it sometime.

Nash Equilibrium

"Even though mutual cooperation leads to a better outcome, if one prisoner chooses mutual cooperation and the other does not, one prisoner's outcome is worse."

It's not about who can make better decisions, it's about understanding that you can't make the best decision on your own. Without cooperation the best decision you can make often still ends up screwing you.

Click to expand...

I'm not assuming I can make the best decision on my own. I want the free decision. Assuming that the state always makes the "best" decision is retarded lol. Also don't understand why for some reason you believe in a free market there is no cooperation. A free market encourages cooperation and working together more than any other non-authoritarian system I can think of. If you want communistic levels of "cooperation" then your clearly just an idiot.

Also you do know the Nash Equilibrium applies to a big government society too? It's why a lot of people are disenfranchised with something such as socialism. The intelligent hard workers become upset that they must compensate (through the power of the state) for the lack of ability or work of other people. In a free market there is no forced compensation only a choice to do so if you would like.

Ultimately it's about freedom. Not everyone has the need to have a daddy to help them through every decision they make.

Koke said:

I'm not assuming I can make the best decision on my own. I want the free decision. Assuming that the state always makes the "best" decision is retarded.

Click to expand...

It's not that the state makes the best decision, it's that without the state the best decision can never be made.

Koke said:

Also don't understand why for some reason you believe in a free market there is no cooperation. A free market encourages cooperation and working together

Click to expand...

Really? Is that why all you free market capitalists are so hell bent on destroying Unions? You do realize a Union

Koke said:

any other non-authoritarian system I can think of. If you want communistic levels of "cooperation" then your clearly just an idiot.

Click to expand...

Authoritarian states, and the form of communism that you are referring to evolve no cooperation. One person telling everyone what to do is not cooperation. However if you have a large majority of people who would all like things to work a certain way, and then a handful of assholes who don't, a democracy like ours can be a very good way of making sure everyone has to play be the same set of rules.

Koke said:

Also you do know the Nash Equilibrium applies to a big government society too? It's why a lot of people are disenfranchised with something such as socialism. The intelligent hard workers become upset that they must compensate (through the power of the state) for the lack of ability or work of other people. In a free market there is no forced compensation only a choice to do so if you would like.

Click to expand...

That's not a Nash Equilibrium. That's a completely different problem that is easily mitigated in modern forms of Democratic Socialism.

MrWonka said:

It's not that the state makes the best decision, it's that without the state the best decision can never be made.


Really? Is that why all you free market capitalists are so hell bent on destroying Unions? You do realize a Union


Authoritarian states, and the form of communism that you are referring to evolve no cooperation. One person telling everyone what to do is not cooperation. However if you have a large majority of people who would all like things to work a certain way, and then a handful of assholes who don't, a democracy like ours can be a very good way of making sure everyone has to play be the same set of rules.


That's not a Nash Equilibrium. That's a completely different problem that is easily mitigated in modern forms of Democratic Socialism.

Click to expand...

How would you possibly know the best decision can't be made without the state? Probably one of the most conceited views I've seen on this website.

Democratic socialism is a meme and doesn't exist. There is either Socialism or it's more authoritarian version which is Communism. Neither of them work, of course... they never will.

Additionally, we are not a "democracy". Nor do I believe that a strict democracy would ever work in a country which is fairly homogeneously diverse like our own.