3 ms·

> weird dislike of government intervention History is the best reason not to trust the government, because it has been behind unbelievably evil things; and pol

> weird dislike of government intervention History is the best reason not to trust the government, because it has been behind unbelievably evil things; and politicians have promised to solve every problem you can think of 10x over, enacted legislation to do so, and lo-and-behold they all still exist.

ZanyProgrammer 5y ago
[flagged]
InitialLastName 5y ago
> History is the best reason not to trust the government, because it has been behind unbelievably evil things; Government, being effectively the primary means that people have to organize themselves, is a force multiplier for human impact; it's intellectually dishonest to blame it for the unbelievably evil things people have made it do without crediting it for the unbelievably good things.
- ErikVandeWater 5y ago
  I didn't argue the government deserves no credit. Enforcing basic rule of law is essential for life to be anything but miserable. I argued giving it power to "intervene" has a proven track record of (at worst) causing evil things to happen, and (at best) not solving what it has sought to solve.
  - InitialLastName 5y ago
    To the topic of this article, it is largely due to government that we aren't still putting lead in our gasoline, paint and water pipes; most of the issue now is in the deteriorating housing stock that our (free-market-driven) development pattern (money goes into sprawl, leaving older, decaying housing stock in the hands of people who can't afford remediation, ditto at a local tax base level) hasn't updated.
  - Rury 5y ago
    >I argued giving it power to "intervene" has a proven track record of... This argument seems kind of weird or hypocritical to me. Government is nothing other than a group of people. Same with corporations. Of course, when someone intervenes against what you want or against your morals, you're going to dislike it or may even deem it evil. As after all, that's your opinion. Problem is not everyone in society has the same opinion on matters, hence why politics is a thing. Perhaps if you think the government (people) shouldn't have power to "intervene", you (a person), or another group you approve of (yet again people) also shouldn't have power to "intervene" either? Not that you were arguing this, but... hopefully I've demonstrated my point.
    - ErikVandeWater 5y ago
      > Perhaps if you think the government (people) shouldn't have power to "intervene", you (a person), or another group you approve of (yet again people) also shouldn't have power to "intervene" either? People shouldn't have the ability to intervene with my life choices or property. Government guarantees that others don't do that, but uses its monopoly power to intervene itself. To some extent, I would prefer if it were individuals trying to intervene, because individuals are far less powerful than the government. For example, the government can forcibly search me before I board a plane, but if the government weren't doing that, and only some airlines were playing security theatre, I could simply choose an airline that decided not to waste my time.

ZanyProgrammer 5y ago

[flagged]

InitialLastName 5y ago

> History is the best reason not to trust the government, because it has been behind unbelievably evil things; Government, being effectively the primary means that people have to organize themselves, is a force multiplier for human impact; it's intellectually dishonest to blame it for the unbelievably evil things people have made it do without crediting it for the unbelievably good things.

ErikVandeWater 5y ago
I didn't argue the government deserves no credit. Enforcing basic rule of law is essential for life to be anything but miserable. I argued giving it power to "intervene" has a proven track record of (at worst) causing evil things to happen, and (at best) not solving what it has sought to solve.
- InitialLastName 5y ago
  To the topic of this article, it is largely due to government that we aren't still putting lead in our gasoline, paint and water pipes; most of the issue now is in the deteriorating housing stock that our (free-market-driven) development pattern (money goes into sprawl, leaving older, decaying housing stock in the hands of people who can't afford remediation, ditto at a local tax base level) hasn't updated.
- Rury 5y ago
  >I argued giving it power to "intervene" has a proven track record of... This argument seems kind of weird or hypocritical to me. Government is nothing other than a group of people. Same with corporations. Of course, when someone intervenes against what you want or against your morals, you're going to dislike it or may even deem it evil. As after all, that's your opinion. Problem is not everyone in society has the same opinion on matters, hence why politics is a thing. Perhaps if you think the government (people) shouldn't have power to "intervene", you (a person), or another group you approve of (yet again people) also shouldn't have power to "intervene" either? Not that you were arguing this, but... hopefully I've demonstrated my point.
  - ErikVandeWater 5y ago
    > Perhaps if you think the government (people) shouldn't have power to "intervene", you (a person), or another group you approve of (yet again people) also shouldn't have power to "intervene" either? People shouldn't have the ability to intervene with my life choices or property. Government guarantees that others don't do that, but uses its monopoly power to intervene itself. To some extent, I would prefer if it were individuals trying to intervene, because individuals are far less powerful than the government. For example, the government can forcibly search me before I board a plane, but if the government weren't doing that, and only some airlines were playing security theatre, I could simply choose an airline that decided not to waste my time.