4 ms·

The town government exists for the benefit and service of its residents. It is not a take it or leave it proposition. The author is a resident, and it is theref

by w4 5y ago

The town government exists for the benefit and service of its residents. It is not a take it or leave it proposition. The author is a resident, and it is therefore entirely reasonable for them to petition the town government for some service, and ask that it be put to a vote. If the other residents in the town vote it down, no harm no foul, no one is forced to do anything. But if the residents vote in favor (and they did in this article, by an overwhelming 90% majority) then no one is “forcing” anyone to do anything. Everyone agreed to do it in a vote. It’s how Democracy works. The majority of people won’t bother with all of this, though, because it’s hard. They will instead do what you suggest: pack up and move to somewhere that has the services they desire. That can kill a community over time. Indeed, people moving like you suggest has caused rural communities to whither and decay over the past decade, as people leave them for cities with more services and greater opportunities. It’s not a desirable outcome, and the accessibility of town government to petitions like these doesn’t hurt the community, it helps to protect it by keeping it responsive to its residents’ needs.

matheusmoreira 5y ago
I don't see why people should have to get involved in any way. They already pay their taxes. They shouldn't have to pay with their time and work as well. It's the government's job to figure out what people need and how to implement it.
- EricE 5y ago
  lol - have fun waiting for the roast duck to fly into your mouth! BTW - this is why I hope to hell we never get the government involved in healthcare in this country (US). If you think screw ups around cable internet are fun, have fun trying to get decent health care in a timely manner. I have too many close friends who are vets and watching how the VA jerks them around is disheartening. If you think average citizens are going to rate any better - ha!
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > lol - have fun waiting for the roast duck to fly into your mouth! At this point I don't really expect much from the government. Honestly I wish they'd stop trying so hard to do everything. When company services suck at least I'm not forced to pay them every year. > this is why I hope to hell we never get the government involved in healthcare in this country (US). I have government health care in my country. Forced town meetings and everything. It's a huge mess. Poorly managed and lacking in resources. In some places you can't even wash your hands because there's no water. Politicians are so corrupt they steal money meant for COVID-19 vaccines and masks. Health insurance is still necessary for high quality care.
    - EricE 5y ago
      >At this point I don't really expect much from the government. Honestly I wish they'd stop trying so hard to do everything. When company services suck at least I'm not forced to pay them every year. Bingo - the crux of why government services often suck: because they can. Which is why if you don't want government to suck, you have to actively push on it from the outside. Most people can't be bothered to get involved so you get the freaks, charlatans and otherwise batshit crazy people driving the train - which further exacerbates the problem :p
      - matheusmoreira 5y ago
        > Which is why if you don't want government to suck, you have to actively push on it from the outside. The only reason they suck is their payments are guaranteed and they have no competition. If we get rid of this comfort, they'll have to stop sucking. Not that I expect this to ever happen.
- lordnacho 5y ago
  Wouldn't it be better if people were in fact obliged to be involved? Once a quarter, everyone goes to meet everyone else in a hall, they have the issues presented, and then whoever wants to comment or volunteer can do so. I see it like organ donation. A lot of people would do it if were default-donate (like recent changes in the UK), but if you don't want to you can opt out. Likewise you would be forced to hear the issues, and then you can go home after if you don't care.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    Wouldn't it be better if the government simply did it's job? They're supposed to take care of things like basic infrastructure so that people won't have to care about this stuff. Internet is part of infrastructure. Nobody wants to be forced to attend government meetings. People have better things to do. If the government can't do its job, then people should not have to pay taxes.
    - lordnacho 5y ago
      Assuming we are talking about the type of government that listens to what the governed want, how are we to ensure that happens without participation? The current way is very top-down, big-media heavy. "Hey I want to talk about healthcare" from the top leader. That's great if it's what people actually care about, but there might be other issues, esp local ones.
      - matheusmoreira 5y ago
        I don't know. How do corporations manage to know what people want? I don't see why governments can't do whatever it is that they do.
        lordnacho 5y ago
        Corporations that don't get it right end up closing. They keep getting created and trying various things, and some die and some survive. We can't really do that with government.
- w4 5y ago
  How does the government determine what the people need if the people do not engage with it, and vice-versa? The government is not a foreign occupying power, and we are not its passive consumers. In the US the citizens are the government, and the government governs with their consent. With this comes the responsibility to engage and spend our time every so often to ensure that the government runs to our satisfaction.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > In the US the citizens are the government I remember a video of a US politician making a speech about how "we are not them". Probably referring to the fact the US government routinely does questionable things such as violating the rights of its own citizens in order to protect its own interests. Not sure what his name was... > and the government governs with their consent Not really. Consent implies the right to say no. US citizens can't just tell the US government they don't accept it. Governments use force to impose their rule so if citizens don't accept the government their only choice is armed insurrection. I've been told that the threat of insurrection against the government is a huge reason why americans enjoy their right to bear arms. Those who actually try it though will probably be labeled terrorists and everybody knows how the US treats terrorists.
    - w4 5y ago
      > Consent implies the right to say no. US citizens can't just tell the US government they don't accept it. Yes they can. That’s literally what elections are for.
      - matheusmoreira 5y ago
        Choosing who gets to govern you is not the same as choosing whether to be governed at all. The people in the white house change constantly but the white house itself endures and there's no way to refuse it. If 49% of citizens vote for politician X but politician Y wins by 51% majority, the 49% cannot simply refuse to be governed by someone they did not want in power.
- imgabe 5y ago
  You know that government of the people, by the people, for the people? That's you. You're the people. There's no separate entity that is "the government" that's going to take care of everything for you, except other people, who it turns out, may want different things than what you want.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > There's no separate entity that is "the government" Of course there is. The government exists and is staffed by a very small portion of the general population. I simply don't understand how anyone could believe otherwise. It's not even possible to argue that governments represent the people's interests since corporations constantly lobby it in order to get favorable decisions and laws. > except other people, who it turns out, may want different things than what you want What these people want is irrelevant. This is about what people need. People need things such as essential services and basic infrastructure. This is not controversial in any way. Governments failing to provide this basic stuff defeats their whole purpose.

by w4 5y ago

matheusmoreira 5y ago

I don't see why people should have to get involved in any way. They already pay their taxes. They shouldn't have to pay with their time and work as well. It's the government's job to figure out what people need and how to implement it.

EricE 5y ago
lol - have fun waiting for the roast duck to fly into your mouth! BTW - this is why I hope to hell we never get the government involved in healthcare in this country (US). If you think screw ups around cable internet are fun, have fun trying to get decent health care in a timely manner. I have too many close friends who are vets and watching how the VA jerks them around is disheartening. If you think average citizens are going to rate any better - ha!
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > lol - have fun waiting for the roast duck to fly into your mouth! At this point I don't really expect much from the government. Honestly I wish they'd stop trying so hard to do everything. When company services suck at least I'm not forced to pay them every year. > this is why I hope to hell we never get the government involved in healthcare in this country (US). I have government health care in my country. Forced town meetings and everything. It's a huge mess. Poorly managed and lacking in resources. In some places you can't even wash your hands because there's no water. Politicians are so corrupt they steal money meant for COVID-19 vaccines and masks. Health insurance is still necessary for high quality care.
  - EricE 5y ago
    >At this point I don't really expect much from the government. Honestly I wish they'd stop trying so hard to do everything. When company services suck at least I'm not forced to pay them every year. Bingo - the crux of why government services often suck: because they can. Which is why if you don't want government to suck, you have to actively push on it from the outside. Most people can't be bothered to get involved so you get the freaks, charlatans and otherwise batshit crazy people driving the train - which further exacerbates the problem :p
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago
      > Which is why if you don't want government to suck, you have to actively push on it from the outside. The only reason they suck is their payments are guaranteed and they have no competition. If we get rid of this comfort, they'll have to stop sucking. Not that I expect this to ever happen.
lordnacho 5y ago
Wouldn't it be better if people were in fact obliged to be involved? Once a quarter, everyone goes to meet everyone else in a hall, they have the issues presented, and then whoever wants to comment or volunteer can do so. I see it like organ donation. A lot of people would do it if were default-donate (like recent changes in the UK), but if you don't want to you can opt out. Likewise you would be forced to hear the issues, and then you can go home after if you don't care.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Wouldn't it be better if the government simply did it's job? They're supposed to take care of things like basic infrastructure so that people won't have to care about this stuff. Internet is part of infrastructure. Nobody wants to be forced to attend government meetings. People have better things to do. If the government can't do its job, then people should not have to pay taxes.
  - lordnacho 5y ago
    Assuming we are talking about the type of government that listens to what the governed want, how are we to ensure that happens without participation? The current way is very top-down, big-media heavy. "Hey I want to talk about healthcare" from the top leader. That's great if it's what people actually care about, but there might be other issues, esp local ones.
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago
      I don't know. How do corporations manage to know what people want? I don't see why governments can't do whatever it is that they do.
      - lordnacho 5y ago
        Corporations that don't get it right end up closing. They keep getting created and trying various things, and some die and some survive. We can't really do that with government.
w4 5y ago
How does the government determine what the people need if the people do not engage with it, and vice-versa? The government is not a foreign occupying power, and we are not its passive consumers. In the US the citizens are the government, and the government governs with their consent. With this comes the responsibility to engage and spend our time every so often to ensure that the government runs to our satisfaction.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > In the US the citizens are the government I remember a video of a US politician making a speech about how "we are not them". Probably referring to the fact the US government routinely does questionable things such as violating the rights of its own citizens in order to protect its own interests. Not sure what his name was... > and the government governs with their consent Not really. Consent implies the right to say no. US citizens can't just tell the US government they don't accept it. Governments use force to impose their rule so if citizens don't accept the government their only choice is armed insurrection. I've been told that the threat of insurrection against the government is a huge reason why americans enjoy their right to bear arms. Those who actually try it though will probably be labeled terrorists and everybody knows how the US treats terrorists.
  - w4 5y ago
    > Consent implies the right to say no. US citizens can't just tell the US government they don't accept it. Yes they can. That’s literally what elections are for.
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago
      Choosing who gets to govern you is not the same as choosing whether to be governed at all. The people in the white house change constantly but the white house itself endures and there's no way to refuse it. If 49% of citizens vote for politician X but politician Y wins by 51% majority, the 49% cannot simply refuse to be governed by someone they did not want in power.
imgabe 5y ago
You know that government of the people, by the people, for the people? That's you. You're the people. There's no separate entity that is "the government" that's going to take care of everything for you, except other people, who it turns out, may want different things than what you want.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > There's no separate entity that is "the government" Of course there is. The government exists and is staffed by a very small portion of the general population. I simply don't understand how anyone could believe otherwise. It's not even possible to argue that governments represent the people's interests since corporations constantly lobby it in order to get favorable decisions and laws. > except other people, who it turns out, may want different things than what you want What these people want is irrelevant. This is about what people need. People need things such as essential services and basic infrastructure. This is not controversial in any way. Governments failing to provide this basic stuff defeats their whole purpose.