4 ms·

Blah, blah, blah. The problem isn't some vague platitude about how there is "too much government". This wasn't caused by Social Security or other defined benef

by Bud 14y ago

Blah, blah, blah. The problem isn't some vague platitude about how there is "too much government". This wasn't caused by Social Security or other defined benefit programs (which make up most of "government"), or by the Veterans Administration, or by the Postal Service, or by FDA. It was caused by one specific agency, created by W, which should never have been created, is duplicative by its very nature, and which has run amok. Homeland Security. And no, this isn't evidence that we are heading for a Gestapo society. No. The Gestapo was highly organized, disciplined, and effective. Homeland Security, by contrast, is a bunch of minimum-wage flunkies, unable to get a job anywhere else because of malfeasance, complete lack of job skills, illiteracy, or a combination of these, which fails to accomplish anything of note whatsoever. Continuing the pablum, you feed us a line about how fishing licenses are evil. I'm sorry, but we've had dozens of large world fisheries be over-fished to extinction. Mark me down in the columns as being in favor of responsible management of wildlife; this is another example of an area in which we need government. Off-topic comparisons to Argentina, similiarly, do not really convince one that the entire US government is inherently bad. I know libertarians seek any and all excuses to drone on about this, but spare us. Just fix or abolish Homeland Security.

robomartin 14y ago
There's nothing whatsoever wrong with conservation and responsible fishing or hunting. That has nothing whatsoever to do with me not being able to fish without a license. I should be able to fish any time I want without having to have a license as a prerequisite. Now, we can debate ideas on how to prevent over-fishing and over-hunting. And that's OK. I am all for that. I won't put forth any proposals here because it is a complex subject. Licenses don't stop over-fishing. I've seen people take fish species, sizes and quantities that they are not supposed to. See, here's the difference. I firmly believe that people --outside of extreme circumstances-- are good, not evil. For me at least, published guidance on such things as what species, sized and quantities to take would be enough. I don't need a law and a guy with a uniform and a gun to make me abide by reasonably justified social guidelines. Maybe some people do. I think most don't. A license, a background check or a permit and a set of laws will never prevent bad actors to, well, act badly. I am using this idea of fishing licenses as an example of how much control government has over you. I live near a lake. I also live in earthquake country. Let's say we have an earthquake that takes down our infrastructure for a few weeks. If I need to walk over to the lake and fish in order to feed my family for a couple of weeks I should not need a government permit to do so. It is a fundamental right as a human animal on this planet to be able to feed yourself and yours. What's more basic than that? We have taken it to the level where you could be arrested for providing for your family. Not gonna happen? It's up to the thug with the gun isn't it. And, by the way, you are driving with one hand. What? Politicians and officials don't twist things their way in the US like in places like South America? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST-eE4Ud7nw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST-eE4Ud7nw Right. I wonder how much of that goes on that we never become aware of.
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  Fish are a community resource and you should not get to take someone else's share of them, especially not to the point of destroying the population. If you get in a situation where nobody can buy food, nobody is going to be enforcing the no-fishing law. It's a general rule. Courts exist for a reason. If someone is going to lie about the fish they take then they didn't need to bother buying a license in the first place. How is removing the ability to punish bad actors is going to improve anything?
InclinedPlane 14y ago
DHS is a problem but it is not the problem. It's a symptom of the problem of excessive government control over our lives. For the most part the DHS is just an amalgam of other agencies anyway, and those would still exist even if the DHS did not.
- narag 14y ago
  Excessive government control is not exactly the same as big government. IOW, you can be against too much control (i.e. massive spying on innocent citizens) and still want public healthcare and so on.
  - InclinedPlane 14y ago
    In theory, sure, in practice I don't think it's ever worked out that way. Can you give examples of countries with sizable government expenditures (e.g. 40% GDP or more) that do not also feature onerous regulation and extensive government interference over many aspects of daily life?
    - narag 14y ago
      I can't give examples without that expenditures either. To be honest, I don't know which countries are on either side of that boundary, but countries that are usually put in the big state bag, like scandinavian ones, are not specially known for much state interference. BTW, I would only consider first world democracies. Others' problems are arguably caused by different, more obvious, factors.
sneak 14y ago
> And no, this isn't evidence that we are heading for a Gestapo society. No. The Gestapo was highly organized, disciplined, and effective. Homeland Security, by contrast, is a bunch of minimum-wage flunkies, unable to get a job anywhere else because of malfeasance, complete lack of job skills, illiteracy, or a combination of these, which fails to accomplish anything of note whatsoever. What about the NSA/CIA who have managed to wholesale wiretap everyone domestically without hesitation or meaningful resistance? You're full of shit when you suggest that the problem is with a single, disorganized agency.
- Bud 14y ago
  I did not intend to suggest that other parts of the defense apparatus might not also be doing bad things; I was talking only about this particular incident. I do, however, think that if we just stripped away all of the parts of DHS that were a reaction to 9/11, that would solve at least some of our problems.

by Bud 14y ago

robomartin 14y ago

There's nothing whatsoever wrong with conservation and responsible fishing or hunting. That has nothing whatsoever to do with me not being able to fish without a license. I should be able to fish any time I want without having to have a license as a prerequisite. Now, we can debate ideas on how to prevent over-fishing and over-hunting. And that's OK. I am all for that. I won't put forth any proposals here because it is a complex subject. Licenses don't stop over-fishing. I've seen people take fish species, sizes and quantities that they are not supposed to. See, here's the difference. I firmly believe that people --outside of extreme circumstances-- are good, not evil. For me at least, published guidance on such things as what species, sized and quantities to take would be enough. I don't need a law and a guy with a uniform and a gun to make me abide by reasonably justified social guidelines. Maybe some people do. I think most don't. A license, a background check or a permit and a set of laws will never prevent bad actors to, well, act badly. I am using this idea of fishing licenses as an example of how much control government has over you. I live near a lake. I also live in earthquake country. Let's say we have an earthquake that takes down our infrastructure for a few weeks. If I need to walk over to the lake and fish in order to feed my family for a couple of weeks I should not need a government permit to do so. It is a fundamental right as a human animal on this planet to be able to feed yourself and yours. What's more basic than that? We have taken it to the level where you could be arrested for providing for your family. Not gonna happen? It's up to the thug with the gun isn't it. And, by the way, you are driving with one hand. What? Politicians and officials don't twist things their way in the US like in places like South America? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST-eE4Ud7nw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST-eE4Ud7nw Right. I wonder how much of that goes on that we never become aware of.

Dylan16807 14y ago
Fish are a community resource and you should not get to take someone else's share of them, especially not to the point of destroying the population. If you get in a situation where nobody can buy food, nobody is going to be enforcing the no-fishing law. It's a general rule. Courts exist for a reason. If someone is going to lie about the fish they take then they didn't need to bother buying a license in the first place. How is removing the ability to punish bad actors is going to improve anything?

InclinedPlane 14y ago

DHS is a problem but it is not the problem. It's a symptom of the problem of excessive government control over our lives. For the most part the DHS is just an amalgam of other agencies anyway, and those would still exist even if the DHS did not.

narag 14y ago
Excessive government control is not exactly the same as big government. IOW, you can be against too much control (i.e. massive spying on innocent citizens) and still want public healthcare and so on.
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  In theory, sure, in practice I don't think it's ever worked out that way. Can you give examples of countries with sizable government expenditures (e.g. 40% GDP or more) that do not also feature onerous regulation and extensive government interference over many aspects of daily life?
  - narag 14y ago
    I can't give examples without that expenditures either. To be honest, I don't know which countries are on either side of that boundary, but countries that are usually put in the big state bag, like scandinavian ones, are not specially known for much state interference. BTW, I would only consider first world democracies. Others' problems are arguably caused by different, more obvious, factors.

sneak 14y ago

> And no, this isn't evidence that we are heading for a Gestapo society. No. The Gestapo was highly organized, disciplined, and effective. Homeland Security, by contrast, is a bunch of minimum-wage flunkies, unable to get a job anywhere else because of malfeasance, complete lack of job skills, illiteracy, or a combination of these, which fails to accomplish anything of note whatsoever. What about the NSA/CIA who have managed to wholesale wiretap everyone domestically without hesitation or meaningful resistance? You're full of shit when you suggest that the problem is with a single, disorganized agency.

Bud 14y ago
I did not intend to suggest that other parts of the defense apparatus might not also be doing bad things; I was talking only about this particular incident. I do, however, think that if we just stripped away all of the parts of DHS that were a reaction to 9/11, that would solve at least some of our problems.