English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Today I see people wanting big government to do "this and that" with the tax dollar and the free market's money supply. If the government is going to "help" so much, why don't we just give everything to them? Wouldn't that be better for everyone? (sarcasm) Who doesn't want 435 congressmen running 300 million people instead of them running themselves?

2007-02-20 03:06:26 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Government

13 answers

Right. Today people demand freedom, they just define it differently. Freedom today is freedom from responsibility.

It's too hard to learn how to save for retirement, and I might make a mistake, let the gvmt to it for me.

I can't afford health care insurance AND my new car, so the gvmt should give me my health care.

Children interfere with my free cash, give me free gvmt education and day care to raise them.

Finding a job is tough, and keeping ahead of technology is hard, give me a guaranteed job and tell my employer how much he should pay me.

That way I can watch my TV, drink my beer, and have just enough cash to play the lotto every day.

2007-02-20 03:15:48 · answer #1 · answered by radical4capitalism 3 · 1 0

Well, the government requires money to do things too, but in the private sector they're more upfront about charging you. They can't do "This AND that" with the tax dollar, unless taxes are increased, which people hate.

Also, if the government did everything, who would be there to actually DO the work? contractors are hired from the private sector to do the work of the government an a frequent basis

2007-02-20 03:13:30 · answer #2 · answered by anto687 3 · 0 0

Private sector participation in running governments enhances healthy competition and makes goods and services available and affordable. It also breaks the back of monopoly mostly enjoyed by government agencies in most country's economy. Private sector participation provides employment opportunities for both skilled and unskilled labour. Depressingly, running government in some countries is seen as lucrative business venture and consequently, politicians are wont to, and in some cases renege on thier electoral promises and policies. In instances such as these, so much confidence is lost when it relates to providing quality and adequate service delivery. The sincerity of 435 congressmen and thier likes globally are apparently doubful. Ultimately, private sector participation boosts the economy of nations.

2007-02-20 03:36:39 · answer #3 · answered by lacactus 1 · 0 0

The problem is that people do not want to take personal responsibility for their lives. So they turn to the government for help and support. Now we have given so much control of our lives to the government that we are becoming increasingly dependent on their help and support. It's like the snowball effect. If things continue this way we will eventually be forced to fill out a government form (have it notarized and signed by a witness) before we can buy toilet paper. (extreme - yes. But could be a scary reality)

2007-02-20 03:25:58 · answer #4 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 0 0

Communism sounds better as a concept than a working theory.

I wish Uncle Sam didn't have so much of our money to run around with. They certainly are an argument against giving them anymore.

They may agree on everything, but only if its non-binding, they wouldn't want to commit to anything and actually fall off that fence they're trying to stay balanced on.

2007-02-20 03:20:27 · answer #5 · answered by Firespider 7 · 0 0

1984, when everyone hears this they think it's a book about a government that sees everything "big brother is watching you" and all that. But that's only a small part of it, 1984 is about a govern ment that controls everything. Before you ask for a government should pay for everything, first ask, dosn't a gevernment have the right to cantrol that which it pays for?

2007-02-20 04:22:30 · answer #6 · answered by Coyote81 3 · 0 0

google - Fabian socialist

our forefathers did not trust government for a reason. and people have been taught to think otherwise. that goes for republicans and democrats alike. this is just a small taste of the government control coming. the new laws passed would make any Stalinist proud. It going to get worst before it gets better. Google - ten pillars of communism. tell me if that doesn't sound like our country today? People had better wake up soon. God bless you.

2007-02-20 03:17:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

That would be all well and good except that if you recall it didn't work in theU.S.S.R. IN MY OPINION the government has its hands in to much of the private sector and is operating outside of what the constitution says it should be doing.

2007-02-20 03:14:52 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

private itself is one which sees minimal intervention of govt.that intervention too is on the policies and there is no direct hurdling by govt.
Where govt plays full or major part of game it no longer remains same it becomes private sector.
Money is the 'accepted' fuel of economy so it has to have a major role

2007-02-20 03:13:58 · answer #9 · answered by wizzrad 1 · 0 0

If you want EVERYTHING run by the government, then you want either a DICTATORSHIP or a COMMUNIST state. Taxation without representation....it would be a glorious step backwards!

2007-02-20 03:12:36 · answer #10 · answered by bradxschuman 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers