Here's one for the political junkies?

Question

How come all these politicians carry on about the government being too big, but they are not the first ones to let their jobs be phased out?

Oh, by the way...I don't hate the government. I just find it rather ironic, almost humorous.

Answer 1

It is a phenomenon called bureaucratic dysfunction. It doesn't just happen in the United States. It happens everywhere in the world. The purpose of government is to demonstrate why it is right and just for government to keep on governing.

It has been going on forever. Machiavelli railed about it in the late 1400's in Italy. That was back in the days when the DiMedici's and the Borghia's were in a virtual civil war in Italy.

I personally think that people get a little weird about big government. It is a lot better for government to be big than small in SOME but not ALL cases.

Taxes are oftentimes lower in big governments because governments develop infrastructure. In countries where there is no infrastructure, like Third World countries, more people get killed by all the things infrastructure protects them against.

In the United States, people can travel freely from one part of the country to the other. In third world countries, the lack of roads and access is what also causes famine, civil wars, deaths due to natural disasters. Phasing out the Highway Department would mean that people couldn't move freely, that goods and services couldn't travel freely, thereby creating shortages.

If you phased out politicians jobs, there would be no infrastructure for conflict resolution. If you phased out the health department, there would be no infrastructure for health care. And there would be no infrastructure for resolving health care issues like Medicare Part D, or health insurance.

If you want to hate government, you have a right to do that. But it is necessary, if for no other reason than to protect and maintain the infrastructure that protects us from being a third world country.

Answer 2

I predominantly hear to Air united states contained in the motorized vehicle, they seem to be a lot less hateful than their conservative pundit opposite numbers. i really income from the archives coverage on PBS and NPR. i imagine they have a tendency to be the most balanced. I do study some articles on-line, yet i'm consistently skeptical of the media presently. some thing tells me we not often get the full tale and that very almost each and every little thing is slanted to the right. Ask your journalist acquaintances (as I have); they'll inform you that it truly is the way issues are leaning presently, now to not the left as lots of those neo-cons may have you ever trust. yet a junkie, no. A passionate observer and supporter and activist (even as time enables) sure. yet I have come to the appropriate that even if I thrive on being suggested, there is not adequate political will in this united states (your 20%) to electrify a real replace in our flesh pressers. So I is honestly not a junkie till I believe that fluctuate is achievable or perhaps inevitable. maximum acceptable desires, and Tabitha is both joking or insane. BTW, maximum of my acquaintances/kinfolk are both politically in contract or apathetic. about 50-50.

Answer 3

They don't want to give up the power their job gives them.

Answer 4

They're selfish. They are talk about people below them.

Answer 5

It's all about the $$$$!

Answer 6

GREED