But the government is the people. At least, that's the principle that's supposed to underlie socialism or democracy.
It dont matter if the government is people. Let individuals do there business freely. They can do all that better by themselves vs a body of people made of a system of big government.
Another opinion not back by facts.
Communisms history is one of death. I just assumed you knew already. But, ok, here
Doesn't less tax = more poverty, since the goods and services needed for prosperity would have to be acquired individually, at exorbitant prices and with considerable time and effort?
You have some pretty hefty, unfounded assumptions in that question. And those assumptions dont even make sense.
If you have less taxes, that means everyone has more money. So, no, not more poverty.
And yes, individuals then create the prosperity with there more FREED UP time since theres less time on red tape regulations and taxes. That means prosperity will happen MORE so vs if enifficent government does it.
Also the prices of the services and goods wont be more, they will be less. The market will decide the prices. And since government wont be doing it, prices will be LESS rather then more. You see, if people gotta spend more time and money complying with tax forms and regulations, that then has to make them charge higher prices for there goods and services since more of there time and money is taken from them. So, they gotta up prices to compensate. Government is inefficient. This should be common sense.
Pooling funds (taxes) gives governments negotiating power, plus governments (co-ops) can buy in bulk and, as non-profits, can distribute services to members at cost. Pooling funds can also provide a social safety net, disaster relief, protection, &c.
I think much of this libertarianism is spillover from industry's decades long fight against the "restrictive" regulations originally put in place to curb robber barons, stock manipulators and predatory bankers.
Business owners can buy in bulk by themselves and THEY DO. What you just said there is government do our business for us. Are you kidding me?
And as for the robbers, ya, thats governments ONLY ROLE is to punish wrong doing. Its not its role to take care of us.
Americans were prosperous during the high-tax years after WWII, and industry thrived. Inhabitants of high-tax, high-regulation societies outside the US, like the Scandinavians, are prosperous and free in their 'socialism' and don't find their governments overly restrictive.
I don't see the connection.
Any country can still prosper if you dont HAVE too much socialism. Once you step over the too much line, thats when it gets bad. Where that line begins, varries from country to coutry based on there own unique ways.
But you don't believe christianity is bad because Christian theocracies don't work. Christianity and communism are both philosophies that can be used, for good or for ill, to govern.
I'm neither a Christian nor a communist, by the way, (I'm a mixed economy capitalist but who believes essential services should never be privatized and in strong favor of unions, workers rights, and closing wealth gaps and prevention of wealth hoarding.)
What you just said there sounds like communism. You called it a MIX, but after the description i didnt see no mix. No privitization? Thats also what communism is for.
Whats wrong with people being free? Why dont most on here see this?
but I know that the communists I run into today in large do not identify with any communist governments that have existed. Ditto with most Christians and theocratic rule.
I bet all the people within those past societies NEVER thought they would turn horrible, but then it did and they were in shock.
Communists are like children playing with a gernaid. They toy with the pin, pull it, it blows up, there soul pops out of there body and they say "ahhh, wha happen?" Lol.
I agree, so long as the incentive we are talking about is more than just money. Which was Einstein's point and why pushing beyond financial incentive, as socialist societies are wont to do, creates stronger societies.
Thats fine, but again, government doing this wont work. Government creating incentives only works through government LEAVING PEOPLE ALONE.
Check it out sometime. Compare US metrics on things like education, longevity, happiness, crime etc to other G20 nations that swing left.
I will do that.
I just looked up to compare the education one. I found this.
"The U.S.
education system is mediocre
compared to the rest of the world, according to an international ranking of OECD
countries. ... Not much has changed since 2000, when the U.S. scored along the OECD average in every subject: This year, the U.S. scores below average in math and ranks 17th among the 34 OECD
countries.Dec 3, 2013
The Atlantic › archive › 2013/12
American Schools vs. the World: Expensive, Unequal, Bad at Math ..."
And this
"At the postsecondary level, the percentage of GDP that the United States spent on total government and private expenditures (2.6 percent) was higher than the average of OECD countries (1.5 percent) and higher than the percentages of all other OECD countries reporting data.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of Education › indicator_cmd
Education Expenditures by Country - National Center for Education ..."
So yes, mediocre education and spend more for it to top it off.
Thats pretty pathetic. And it leads me to conclude what i already been saying. Government is inefficient.
I believe the school system and college should be all privatized. That way the education system competes and that makes for better edducation curriculums. It also makes prices low since there compitition.
And of course, homeschooling would be even cheaper. So, if people did alot of that, the prices of schools would go down for that reason too.
We agree in theory. In practice, not so much.
Explain more?
