3 ms·
I'd like to offer: both can be bad. Any large system is going to have a lot of inefficiencies, and something to dislike for everyone. But its overall function c
by causal 2y ago
I'd like to offer: both can be bad. Any large system is going to have a lot of inefficiencies, and something to dislike for everyone. But its overall function can still be important enough that taking a sledge hammer to the whole thing is still much more harmful than whatever motivated picking up the hammer.
- dennis_jeeves2 2y ago>Any large system is going to have a lot of inefficiencies Hence one needs the free market. The govt. typically lack the checks and balance that the free market automatically provides hence it _always_ results in bloat.
- causal 2y agoRight, understanding that the government itself creates the space for the free market to operate, so any tinkering with it ought to be done carefully. New companies will replace old ones that die- and this is good. Failed states can and do happen, and it would be hubris to think it couldn't happen here.
- dennis_jeeves2 2y ago>Right, understanding that the government itself creates the space for the free market to operate, In the US the gov has become too big so that it cannot support a free market. ( there are some estimates that say 60% of our income goes into taxes of various forms). More over govt are the reason for a no freemarket. For me Govt is synonymous with the mafia, a more polished, legalized version ( yes, we differ here, so we can leave it at that) >so any tinkering with it ought to be done carefully. Most of the govt can be removed and no one will notice except govt employees.
- causal 2y agoI suspect you greatly underestimate how much your life has been protected by the government you wish to eviscerate, but I suppose we shall see
- dennis_jeeves2 2y agoNo I do not think so- America owes its success to the common Americans, not to the govt. Personal question: Have you lived/worked at length in any third world country?
- causal 2y agoIn fact I have! And that has greatly informed my opinion: the people I encountered in those countries were every bit as capable as common Americans, but they lacked the institutional support which Americans so easily take for granted.
- dennis_jeeves2 2y agoWrong, In my observation, common people in most 3rd world countries (but not all) are corrupt, lack ethics, are lazy, often stupid etc. Examples: Mexico, most African countries, China etc. Govt. are universally corrupt regardless of how developed the nation is, though they will vary to the degree to which they are corrupt. We are taking common everyday interactions: small businesses, deals, trade, customer service etc. Americans by far ( and so would citizens of other first world nations) are relatively superior culturally when it comes to everyday interactions.
- causal 2y agoInteresting. This might explain why racism so often shows up in crowds wanting to overthrow the government: if you genuinely believe your people are naturally superior to others, then you might actually come to believe your success has nothing to do with your institutions.
- dennis_jeeves2 2y agoWhy label my view as racism? This is what is observed. (Side note - the people who migrate from those 3rd world nations to America are generally a reliable, conscientious lot, way much more than people in their home countries)