Tag Archives: Role of Government

Where The Liberal Confronts Proper Role of Government

Role of Government

I often harp on the proper role of government.  In fact, it’s a favorite topic of mine.

“Yes, programs that provide milk to mothers are good for the mothers and the children, but is that the proper role of government?”

So you can imagine my excitement when I was confronted with a liberal questioning if a particular policy was, indeed, the role of government.  After all, it is the fall back position of the liberal to use the coercive force of the state to force compliance for an otherwise unpopular program.

“Don’t wanna voluntarily donate money to the plight of the spotted owl?  Fine, I’ll elect 2 new county commissioners and force you to pay taxes to do just that.”

Anyway, to the chase:

Is this the role government ought to be playing in people’s lives? John Stuart Mill condemned such efforts, writing, “The only purpose for which power may be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.”

People may make bad choices, Mill and others argue. But that’s one of the costs of a free society. And it’s not as though government intervention is risk-free: The government may make even worse decisions on people’s behalf. Or, when it treats them like children, why expect that they will ever act like adults?

What sorcery this?  Who has swooped in and transformed my liberal into a rock-ribbed conservative?  What government over reach could they possibly be protesting?

Or, as described below:

But the Worcester program goes a step beyond many of these initiatives, as the penalty for not complying is so great.

Jeepers!  What horribleness could this be?

“IMPORTANT MESSAGE: Residents Required to Go to Work/Attend School.” As long as they weren’t disabled or over 55, the letter elaborated, at least one member of each household had to go to work or school, or risk eviction.

Bullshit!

How dare the government over reach when applying conditions to government over reach!?

Yes, you read that right.  Forget the fact that confiscating my money to pay for someone else’s home is somehow not over reach, the radical idea that such a recipient should work or learn a skill enabling work IS over reach is only  possible in the mind of the leftist.

 

Social Security: Open Question To Conservatives

So, conservatives are seeking to over turn Obamacare on the basis that the government can not force you to purchase a product.  I agree with this stance.  If Obama can force me to purchase health insurance, control what that insurance looks like and even who sells that insurance, there is nothing to stop him from forcing me to purchase tickets to the Raleigh Philharmonic Orchestra.  Or a car from GM.  Or organic carrots from Democrat farmers.

But, as conservatives, we have to answer to our stance on Social Security.

Our answer to the current mess that is Social Security is to continue to collect 6.5% from the employer and the employee.  BUT we want some % of that 13% to go to personal private investment accounts.  These accounts would belong to the tax payer and he could even manage those accounts.

In short, we would be enabling the government to force us to buy a product; an investment account.

It seems there is no discernible difference.

What Is The Role Of Government

If we erect government to resolve disputes, protect from fraud and safeguard Liberty, where do we get the idea that we need to redistribute wealth?

Why do we tax from some and give to others?

Leftist Californians* Hate Parents

* Let’s get this out of the way right away. I know this is redundant.

From the never ending font of all things cool, we get this:

California Assembly Bill 889 will require these protections for all “domestic employees,” including nannies, housekeepers and caregivers.

Under AB 889, household “employers” (aka “parents”) who hire a babysitter on a Friday night will be legally obligated to pay at least minimum wage to any sitter over the age of 18 (unless it is a family member), provide a substitute caregiver every two hours to cover rest and meal breaks, in addition to workers’ compensation coverage, overtime pay, and a meticulously calculated timecard/paycheck.

What kind of special intersection of crazy and powerful could create this law?

A Him

Let’s get one thing clear.

  1. I care for the people less fortunate.
  2. The government has no role in that caring.

Okay, that’s two, but the second is important.  The government has a role.  And that role is to act as the referee in disputes.  It is to make sure that we all face the same rules and laws.  Sure, there is a cost in maintaining a government, so we tax to pay for it.  But that role of government is not meant to take money from those who have it and just flat out GIVE it to those who don’t.

When that role is given to the government, bad things happen.  Really bad things.

Continue reading

Home Values: Government Regulation Doesn’t Work

Government has no place in the market.  In so much that the government needs to spend money on things that constitute the proper role of government, there is nothing that the State does that is expressly efficient.

The State is unable to address the needs and/or wants of the populace well enough to signal an efficient use of scare resources; resources that have alternative uses.  The government can, by force of gun or sword, dictate where money is spent, to be sure.  But that government has neither the ability or will to intuit that “will of the people who is the mark of a dynamic market.

What does this mean?

It means the government is incapable of spending your money better than you are.

Continue reading

Role Of Government: Open Thread

For my liberal friends:

What is the characteristic of “a thing” that requires the State enact that thing rather than make sure that thing simply occurs.

For example, the State should be concerned with feeding its people, yet the State doesn’t participate in feeding the people.  However, the State should be concerned with educating its people AND the State feels IT has to do the educating.

Why?

Charter Schools

There are a couple of topics that keep me in conflict; I admit it. I have tried over the last few years to resolve the issue but can’t really seem to come to a good conclusion.

Lemme explain.

Continue reading

North Carolina Charter Schools

There are a couple of topics that keep me in conflict; I admit it.  I have tried over the last few years to resolve the issue but can’t really seem to come to a good conclusion.

Lemme explain.

Continue reading