4 ms·

No, they are not generally more corrupt; they are very often more corrupt. They are also very often less corrupt. There are far more of them with the consequent

by SiVal 14y ago

No, they are not generally more corrupt; they are very often more corrupt. They are also very often less corrupt. There are far more of them with the consequent variety and---best of all---the smaller the corrupt locale, the easier it is to leave it for a better one. Nobody forces you to put up with San Francisco's government, but if Washington government becomes just like San Francisco, that's a MUCH bigger problem.

eli_gottlieb 14y ago
In which case you've completely devalued citizenship in a community/place entirely. <sarcasm>Obviously if my favored candidate for Mayor of Haifa loses the election, I should quit my job, sell/rerent my apartment, and move to Yerushalayyim!</sarcasm> Except that, no, wait, my job, my dwelling, my friends, my family (if I had one), and my community are all tied down to the place I already live. Implementing a "free market in local governments" has the massive negative externality of entirely destroying people's capacity to build roots and communities by staying in one place, and effectively turns the population into permanent ideological/lifestyle/economic migrants.
- SiVal 14y ago
  The ability to vote with your feet is one of the most valuable checks and balances on government. Few people leave after one lost election, but if the government gradually becomes toxic, it's better to have alternatives nearby than to have to leave the country. And the more easily you can leave a bad government's jurisdiction for a better one, the harder it is for it to just do whatever it feels like doing to you, and the more likely you are to be able to stay where you are. I find your example ironic, given how many Israelis are in Israel because they made a choice to leave their jobs, dwellings, friends, etc., in one society to join another. Few did so after one lost election, but most Israelis I've talked to have been very glad that they had alternatives. Many would have been happier if they had had a good alternative closer to home, but those back home who preferred large-scale governments deliberately eliminated the possibility of local alternatives.
  - eli_gottlieb 14y ago
    I find your example ironic, given how many Israelis are in Israel because they made a choice to leave their jobs, dwellings, friends, etc., in one society to join another. Few did so after one lost election, but most Israelis I've talked to have been very glad that they had alternatives. Many would have been happier if they had had a good alternative closer to home, but those back home who preferred large-scale governments deliberately eliminated the possibility of local alternatives. More right-wing nonsense! Because a government large enough to provide health-care is automatically LARGE ENOUGH TO COMMIT MAJOR GENOCIDE AND DRIVE YOUR WHOLE ETHNICITY OUT OF THE COUNTRY! We had better implement a system of permanent migration in the American style to make sure nobody suffers genocide by letting everyone flee to everywhere as soon as someone passes an income tax! Or, you know, we could, unlike you, decide to base our politics on something other than childish, paranoid anarchist hysteria and actually implement an effective democracy that lets us run our lives without having to hoard guns and gold bullion in the family caravan.

by SiVal 14y ago

eli_gottlieb 14y ago

In which case you've completely devalued citizenship in a community/place entirely. <sarcasm>Obviously if my favored candidate for Mayor of Haifa loses the election, I should quit my job, sell/rerent my apartment, and move to Yerushalayyim!</sarcasm> Except that, no, wait, my job, my dwelling, my friends, my family (if I had one), and my community are all tied down to the place I already live. Implementing a "free market in local governments" has the massive negative externality of entirely destroying people's capacity to build roots and communities by staying in one place, and effectively turns the population into permanent ideological/lifestyle/economic migrants.

SiVal 14y ago
The ability to vote with your feet is one of the most valuable checks and balances on government. Few people leave after one lost election, but if the government gradually becomes toxic, it's better to have alternatives nearby than to have to leave the country. And the more easily you can leave a bad government's jurisdiction for a better one, the harder it is for it to just do whatever it feels like doing to you, and the more likely you are to be able to stay where you are. I find your example ironic, given how many Israelis are in Israel because they made a choice to leave their jobs, dwellings, friends, etc., in one society to join another. Few did so after one lost election, but most Israelis I've talked to have been very glad that they had alternatives. Many would have been happier if they had had a good alternative closer to home, but those back home who preferred large-scale governments deliberately eliminated the possibility of local alternatives.
- eli_gottlieb 14y ago
  I find your example ironic, given how many Israelis are in Israel because they made a choice to leave their jobs, dwellings, friends, etc., in one society to join another. Few did so after one lost election, but most Israelis I've talked to have been very glad that they had alternatives. Many would have been happier if they had had a good alternative closer to home, but those back home who preferred large-scale governments deliberately eliminated the possibility of local alternatives. More right-wing nonsense! Because a government large enough to provide health-care is automatically LARGE ENOUGH TO COMMIT MAJOR GENOCIDE AND DRIVE YOUR WHOLE ETHNICITY OUT OF THE COUNTRY! We had better implement a system of permanent migration in the American style to make sure nobody suffers genocide by letting everyone flee to everywhere as soon as someone passes an income tax! Or, you know, we could, unlike you, decide to base our politics on something other than childish, paranoid anarchist hysteria and actually implement an effective democracy that lets us run our lives without having to hoard guns and gold bullion in the family caravan.