Which do you prefer: Self-reliance or a government nanny-state?

Question

Whatever happened to rugged individualism and self-reliance? Must we continually give up more of our descision-making freedom (and tax money) to the government to make descisions for us?

Obviously government should repair the roads and such. But can't we plan for our own retirement and chooseour own health insurance?

Johnny2times: The problem with the so-called "safety net" is that many choose to make a comfortable hammock out of it.

Answer 1

I'll take the nanny state, if they pay me not to work or give me enough money to stay in school and pay for my medical and take care of my kids and don't send me to war, keep allowing us to have big and bigger guns to hunt with, let taxpayers pay for stadiums to watch battle of the fattest or tallest that I can get to on cheap bus or trolley above and underground rides. Pay me to let my kids attend day care while I go shopping or sit on butt while working in some state agency. Guarantee me a retiremnt and medical if I work at least ten years before I reach 62 and pay me if I can't work wether it is from being too fat or too weak of limb blind wheelchair bound or mentally challenged. Pay to keep pharmaceuticals using colleges to save them money on research. Pay over 55% of the popualtion to work for nanny. nPass out food stamp cards so I can trade them in for food and sell food to Asian markets to buy drugs with the proceeds or gold chains. Pay me to do charity work out of the goodness of my heart.Pave me a nice bicycle road so I can ride my 500 dollar bike with my new shiny spandex and fancy helmet as I help the environment.Give me money and a tax break when my old man runs off and leaves me with a kid no matter how many old men run off and how many kids they leave behind.build my kids a skateboard park so I got somewhere to send them when I, not at home or even when I am.Give me a tree to hug, give me a tree to cut down. Find more jobs in governemtn to take up the slack of college grduats who cannot find a productive job without having to leave country because they are too well edu-casted. "Yes edu-casted!" Clean up the water after I pee in it with my industry. replace the fish my pee and my greed helped decimate. Let the polar bears die but give me cheap gas. send others off to wars that keep the gas prices low.Make sure I have someplace clean to swim outside of the river near my home that my gas and industry has made a mess of.Give me flags made in china cheaply made so I can put them on my suv.Give my comany an environmental and tax break so I can keep my job. Yes I know it is smelly but hey look at me I'm fine. So what if the comany is from Japan or Canada we gotta have jobs.
Here take my kid I couldn't do it but maybe you guys can, MAKE A MAN OUTA HIM!

Answer 2

Self Reliance + a little extra BUT NOT MUCH
I follow the Jeffersonian concept: "Less government is better government
Why?
-Less taxes -> Individuals can use their money MUCH better than the government EVER can... the more money the government has the less efficient they are with it and the more corruption that comes out... No-bid contracting anyone??

-Who is the moral judge? -> Idk who is but there is one thing I know the government SHOULD NOT be it. You should be your own moral judge or set your own moral judge... yes only to a certain extent... no you cannot choose to go around murdering people with no consequences

HOWEVER,
The government should run some things:

Schools: it is extremely important that we make sure that the children that will carry on our society be educated and intelligent

Social Services: The government should run the stuff like sewers, police, firemen, road work etc.

Defense: Yes all the branches of the military should be run by the government simply because the government is the one making the decision if we go to war or not and if the government can't control the military then we could be dead very soon

I am a Libertarian, however my personal views that put upon myself are very conservative HOWEVER, who am I to force my views on you?

Those are my thoughts on the subject,
-TBird, a Libertarian

Answer 3

Loaded question. If you want an honest answer, you wouldn't use the term "nanny-state." Doing so, if you think about it, makes YOU a nanny since you're trying to direct others into thinking your way.

But, while I think self reliance is most important, there are a great many things that individuals can't provide for themselves. In addition, some individuals can't provide for themselves. We are a stronger country with everyone having at least a minimum. Caring societies don't let its people die out.

Answer 4

It is a set up with no choice and you know it Your not given a choice -- its going to be his policy platform which will strangely lack a policy or a platform but be presented in 2 second sound bytes that sound like he has one and a reaction of the other side who if elected will implement the same policy after the fact Obama would have if he won 2 products containing exactly the same sh--t are competeing for your dollar vote in the supermarket and both will cost about the same and so on -- thats it Your going to get what a corporate sponsor has decided you will -- the rest is a show to keep you busy fighting and with the illusion of choice

Answer 5

I cant think of a better word than amen for some reason.our whole system has devolved to the point where now our only option is to argue about who will be our babysitter a big part of the problem in my eyes is that we are so caught up arguing about what party is better when the are both horrible Ex. look at goober he says "im for self-reliance thats why i vote conservative can he not see he has just admitted to need the cons to think for him

Answer 6

Self-reliance with a safety net to catch those who fall through the cracks.

I agree completely. However, it doesn't change the fact that some people will hit hard times.

Maybe it could be set up to be a safety "net" that bounces as opposed to a spider web that catches people. I know its a bit idealistic.

Answer 7

I prefer a self-reliance state and strongly disagree with a govt nanny-state.

The govt implemented those laws to control people's lives, not because they care about us and send out messages that these laws are for our own good .

Answer 8

I prefer self reliance. I don't mind paying taxes for roads, bridges, defense etc. but I don't like being overtaxed to pay for jerks who don't try as hard as me. Losing a third of what I earn to the Feds and the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts is really pissing me off!!!!

Answer 9

Exactly! What business is it of the gov't's whether I wear a helmet or seat belt, or not, or if I spank my own kids in my own home? People say the gov't has no business in the bedroom, and they're right. But it ALSO should stay the hell out of my personal health, education, employment, and retirement decisions.

Answer 10

actually, the founders wanted states to govern themselves and that the fed would provide for the things that the states could not, such as national defense and be an interface for the states in regards to international policy.

Answer 11

Self-reliance baby!