3 ms·

"The government" is people. Are you arguing that society, collectively, should not establish a system of rules that reflects their social norms?

by nrb 8y ago

rnd0 8y ago
>"The government" is people. In theory. In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice...? It's the same with the theory of "the government is the people" and how that works out in practice. See also; citizen's united
onetimemanytime 8y ago
It may take quite a bit for people's decision to trickle up to the government...if it ever reaches there. They vote on 12000 things a year (made up the number, OK) and very few issues are so important to warrant not voting them /rising up.
Sir_Substance 8y ago
>"The government" is people. A relatively small group of people, governing a huge group of people. The granularity gap is crazy. It's very hard for me to get exact numbers, but it seems[1] that the US federal government employs around 2 million people, and the US population is ~328 million. That's 164 people to be governed per employee, and most of those employees are not involved in establishing sets of rules. It is quite beyond the governments capacity to adjust it's rules to handle an individuals personal circumstances or the changing nature of society, which is why there are so many unjust judicial rulings and so many outdated laws still on the books. Governments should stick to making only the rules which _cannot_ be handled at any scale below the millions. Power lines need to be a matched voltage nation-wide. Railway gauges must be the same nation-wide. Petrol from any petrol station should work in any car, and burning it should not be poisonous at any density of cars found anywhere in the nation. These are the things a government is for. Tie-breaking multiple valid solution arguments on an epic scale. It doesn't matter that much what voltage we pick, just that we pick _a_ voltage, singular. Governments are quite incapable of managing smaller-scale decisions. For example, it turns out the cannabis oil is pretty amazing at suppressing fits in people with epilepsy, and MDMA might turn out to be the solution tens of thousands of PTSD sufferers have needed for decades. We've at least suspected both of these things for around half a century. Unfortunately, both substances are regulated by a government so large it is literally not capable of making criminal possession exceptions for universities so that these effects can be studied. Lives have been lost due to this scaling problem. Governments are a great tool for certain problems. For other problems, they are like trying to scrub food off a porcelain bowl with a jackhammer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_civil_service#Employment_by_agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_civil_se...
antidesitter 8y ago
The government is the people. That is a dubious statement that needs support and should not be asserted blithely.

"The government" is people. Are you arguing that society, collectively, should not establish a system of rules that reflects their social norms?

by nrb 8y ago

"The government" is people. Are you arguing that society, collectively, should not establish a system of rules that reflects their social norms?

rnd0 8y ago

>"The government" is people. In theory. In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice...? It's the same with the theory of "the government is the people" and how that works out in practice. See also; citizen's united

onetimemanytime 8y ago

It may take quite a bit for people's decision to trickle up to the government...if it ever reaches there. They vote on 12000 things a year (made up the number, OK) and very few issues are so important to warrant not voting them /rising up.

Sir_Substance 8y ago

>"The government" is people. A relatively small group of people, governing a huge group of people. The granularity gap is crazy. It's very hard for me to get exact numbers, but it seems[1] that the US federal government employs around 2 million people, and the US population is ~328 million. That's 164 people to be governed per employee, and most of those employees are not involved in establishing sets of rules. It is quite beyond the governments capacity to adjust it's rules to handle an individuals personal circumstances or the changing nature of society, which is why there are so many unjust judicial rulings and so many outdated laws still on the books. Governments should stick to making only the rules which _cannot_ be handled at any scale below the millions. Power lines need to be a matched voltage nation-wide. Railway gauges must be the same nation-wide. Petrol from any petrol station should work in any car, and burning it should not be poisonous at any density of cars found anywhere in the nation. These are the things a government is for. Tie-breaking multiple valid solution arguments on an epic scale. It doesn't matter that much what voltage we pick, just that we pick _a_ voltage, singular. Governments are quite incapable of managing smaller-scale decisions. For example, it turns out the cannabis oil is pretty amazing at suppressing fits in people with epilepsy, and MDMA might turn out to be the solution tens of thousands of PTSD sufferers have needed for decades. We've at least suspected both of these things for around half a century. Unfortunately, both substances are regulated by a government so large it is literally not capable of making criminal possession exceptions for universities so that these effects can be studied. Lives have been lost due to this scaling problem. Governments are a great tool for certain problems. For other problems, they are like trying to scrub food off a porcelain bowl with a jackhammer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_civil_service#Employment_by_agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_civil_se...

antidesitter 8y ago

The government is the people. That is a dubious statement that needs support and should not be asserted blithely.