A government's role

[Curious George]

In light of the current covid-19 situation, i am interested in hear various opinions from the around the world of what posters believe a government's role is. I would like to hear what authority the government ought to have, what laws they ought to enact to engage crises and what checks or limitations should be in place.

I would also be interested to hear if you believe the current global situation has altered your views.

Please note that this is in the debate section. If you do not feel comfortable with being challenged by other posters regarding perceived inconsistencies or engaging in those whose viewpoints differ drastically from your own, please simply like other posts that comport with your line of thinking.

Thank you

 

[rational experiences]

I believe all Government's should first question why humanity has gained as an evolved civilization status another inherited life change and life attack first and foremost, to deal with what they claim they represent as their community.

As a speaking voice representative in the greater world community. And not just accept that a virus is being dealt with, when the humans who have died were just the same everyday humans as we all are. Living, believing in their life and owning their life.

And in respect to what a human self is, a working community of humans, caring, I think that most Governments believe that they are doing their best to apply services to their extended family.

For since when would any of them own a belief that this sort of outbreak would occur.

And if a Government can apply a changed standard of service in their community, medical standards heightened should be enabled to exist afterwards also. For it is family first.

 

[sun rise]

My statement of a government role is to highlight and thank our current California governor, Gavin Newsom. He's exemplifying what government can do and should do in a crisis. He's being honest with us, telling us what is known, coordinating and marshaling resources to meet the pandemic and taking decisive action where necessary. He's using the power of government effectively but with restraint. This is acting for all of us collectively.

Most people are listening and voluntarily acting for their own good and the good of all. When utterly selfish people insist that they do whatever they want and to hell with the impact on others, they need to be restrained and if necessary have penalties imposed on them. That is of course a last resort but we've seen that it's necessary sometimes.

There are two statements which sum it up for me. The first is a general statement from which all should flow. The second relates to those who insist on having their way no matter what the consequences:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

And, using an excerpt to illustrate the political point:

nor make a midden of the world’s garden for the sake of some who cannot abide the smell of roses.”

 

[Curious George]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

If the government derives its power from the consent of the governed is that the only check or limitation?

Should, then, a government act in any manner that it will as long as the majority tolerate it?

 

[Curious George]

My statement of a government role is to highlight and thank our current California governor, Gavin Newsom. He's exemplifying what government can do and should do in a crisis. He's being honest with us, telling us what is known, coordinating and marshaling resources to meet the pandemic and taking decisive action where necessary. He's using the power of government effectively but with restraint. This is acting for all of us collectively.

Can you elaborate on what coordinating and marshaling resources means in this instance and might entail in other instances?

 

[Curious George]

I believe all Government's should first question why humanity has gained as an evolved civilization status another inherited life change and life attack first and foremost, to deal with what they claim they represent as their community.

As a speaking voice representative in the greater world community. And not just accept that a virus is being dealt with, when the humans who have died were just the same everyday humans as we all are. Living, believing in their life and owning their life.

And in respect to what a human self is, a working community of humans, caring, I think that most Governments believe that they are doing their best to apply services to their extended family.

For since when would any of them own a belief that this sort of outbreak would occur.

And if a Government can apply a changed standard of service in their community, medical standards heightened should be enabled to exist afterwards also. For it is family first.

Is there any limit to what a government ought to do to provide a "heightened medical standard."

 

[rational experiences]

Is there any limit to what a government ought to do to provide a "heightened medical standard."

If they can achieve it today, then they could have achieved a medical standard before.

Only when hierarchy itself is challenged with loss of self life, do they then due to the circumstance take action as a review of assisting any social level regarding human standards. To be cared for and assisted.

 

[Spirit of Light]

In light of the current covid-19 situation, i am interested in hear various opinions from the around the world of what posters believe a government's role is. I would like to hear what authority the government ought to have, what laws they ought to enact to engage crises and what checks or limitations should be in place.

I would also be interested to hear if you believe the current global situation has altered your views.

Please note that this is in the debate section. If you do not feel comfortable with being challenged by other posters regarding perceived inconsistencies or engaging in those whose viewpoints differ drastically from your own, please simply like other posts that comport with your line of thinking.

Thank you

A government should do everything in their power to make life secure for the people, especially in this time of Covid-19. If they need to use the money to buy enough equipment for hospitals they should do it. They should also make sure small businesses do not get broke because of little work.
For me as a Norwegian citizen, the police and in some cases military should be allowed to make the street safe for us that still can go out. And they should have full access to use the law as it is intended to do in a crisis as Covid-19 has become.

 

[Laika]

I would also be interested to hear if you believe the current global situation has altered your views.

I'm having to reconsider my move towards being more "centrist" and "moderate" in my political views given that this no longer seems to be a viable long-term position to hold. Assuming I survive 2020 for my political beliefs to be relevant to anything, we are going to be in for a bumpy ride over the next couple of years. It's possible the current situation could escalate the polarisation and hostility of previous years, but at the same time the shock-and-awe effects of coronavirus might give us pause to consider our limitations and vulnerabilities. I'm not sure which tendency will prevail as they could lead to very different results.

Because of the U.S. elections I believed 2020 was going to be a decisive year, particularly in the battle over climate change and over the future of democracy in the face of Trump and the alt-right more generally. But this is really something extraordinary. I'm not going to rush to the barricades anytime soon as I think that is premature. But I will have to wait and see what else this year turns up.

 

[Sunstone]

I think many of John Rawls' notions are a good starting place.

 

[exchemist]

In light of the current covid-19 situation, i am interested in hear various opinions from the around the world of what posters believe a government's role is. I would like to hear what authority the government ought to have, what laws they ought to enact to engage crises and what checks or limitations should be in place.

I would also be interested to hear if you believe the current global situation has altered your views.

Please note that this is in the debate section. If you do not feel comfortable with being challenged by other posters regarding perceived inconsistencies or engaging in those whose viewpoints differ drastically from your own, please simply like other posts that comport with your line of thinking.

Thank you

Government has the obvious role of defending its people from the threat, just as it would in a military invasion, by enacting polices that command public support when explained.

 

[Curious George]

I think many of John Rawls' notions are a good starting place.

I've read Rawls, to what are you specifically referring?

 

[Curious George]

Government has the obvious role of defending its people from the threat, just as it would in a military invasion, by enacting polices that command public support when explained.

In ww2, the U.S. government for example, in an effort to defend people and country, created Japanese internment camps. Are these the type of policies you believe a government ought to enact?

 

[Cooky]

In ww2, the U.S. government for example, in an effort to defend people and country, created Japanese internment camps. Are these the type of policies you believe a government ought to enact?

I do sense a period of anarchy looming in the future. Do we choose a police state..? Or anarchy..?

 

[Curious George]

I do sense a period of anarchy looming in the future. Do we choose a police state..? Or anarchy..?

It is in extreme situations that those imaginary lines of limitation that we draw become most relevant. I would hope that a choice between those to extremes exists.

Even if we were cast into either such extreme, my question still stands: Where is a government's role? What are the checks and limitations in that role? Are there lines no government should cross? Even in a crisis?

 

[exchemist]

In ww2, the U.S. government for example, in an effort to defend people and country, created Japanese internment camps. Are these the type of policies you believe a government ought to enact?

In what context?

 

[Cooky]

It is in extreme situations that those imaginary lines of limitation that we draw become most relevant. I would hope that a choice between those to extremes exists.

Even if we were cast into either such extreme, my question still stands: Where is a government's role? What are the checks and limitations in that role? Are there lines no government should cross? Even in a crisis?

Yes there are those lines. Freedom is important for the well-being of the people. Removing it causes anxiety and takes away the sense of well-being required for advanced people to thrive and progress, IMO.

Draconian methods of governance should be resisted by all those with good intentions.

 

[Curious George]

In what context?

In any context?

You suggested that a government should enact polices that command support in an effort to defend people.

I gave a historical example, of one such policy enacted by a government, upon which history looks with compunction.

 

[exchemist]

In any context?

You suggested that a government should enact polices that command support in an effort to defend people.

I gave a historical example, of one such policy enacted by a government, upon which history looks with compunction.

That is just an example of a poor decision.

If I were to intone, solemnly, that "the government's role should not include doing stupid things", you would think that rather a pointless statement, I imagine.

 

[Curious George]

That is just an example of a poor decision.

If I were to intone, solemnly, that "the government's role should not include doing stupid things", you would think that rather a pointless statement, I imagine.

Sure, but when i ask where the limitation and checks should be, and your only point regarding such os that an enactment "command support when explained," what am I left to assume?