POLL: Does the size and role of government exist on a continuum?

[Mac1958]

I've been unable to get a straight answer from another poster on a different thread, so let's try this.

My position is that the size, scope, depth, breadth and authority of governments exist on a continuum. That a country can be, for example, "more" socialist or "less" socialist. "More" authoritarian or "less" authoritarian. "More" capitalist or "less" capitalist.

It seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess not to others.

So please vote and comment, thanks. I voted "Yes, obviously".
.

No.

You either have an authoritarian state or you do not....Varying degrees of relative authoritarian control are irrelevant.....You either have cancer or you do not.

Capitalism is an economic model, not a political one....Socialism is both political and economic.....Black markets (nearly pure capitalism) exist organically outside any form of authoritarian gubmint control.....In fact, such authoritarian tyranny is the root of them being "black" markets.

So let me get this straight, and tell me if I'm wrong.

First, the actual poll question does not bring up socialism. I'm taking about the size of government.

You said "more capitalist or less", and I made the point that capitalism is apolitical...Socialism was mentioned as a contrast.

You don't see anything on the planet in between the USA and Venezuela? Really?
.

Is the USA's gubmint authoritarian or not?....Do they rule by force or not?...Don't haggle over degrees, it's a yes or no question.

So evidently your answer is "no".

Okay, thanks.
.

 

[RodISHI]

free people exchanging value voluntarily...

But that is not an accurate description of what actually results,over time. To which many people working full time and on welfare can attest.

if if your only option is trying to live on a minim wage job the problem is with you with your lack of skills or education, not the wage
learn a skill get an eduction and you wont have to live on minimum wage

Not all necessarily true.

 

[Andylusion]

I've been unable to get a straight answer from another poster on a different thread, so let's try this.

My position is that the size, scope, depth, breadth and authority of governments exist on a continuum. That a country can be, for example, "more" socialist or "less" socialist. "More" authoritarian or "less" authoritarian. "More" capitalist or "less" capitalist.

It seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess not to others.

So please vote and comment, thanks. I voted "Yes, obviously".
.

Sure of course. Social Security is obviously a socialist system. The food at your super market, is obviously a Capitalist system.

That seems self evident.

 

[Oddball]

I've been unable to get a straight answer from another poster on a different thread, so let's try this.

My position is that the size, scope, depth, breadth and authority of governments exist on a continuum. That a country can be, for example, "more" socialist or "less" socialist. "More" authoritarian or "less" authoritarian. "More" capitalist or "less" capitalist.

It seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess not to others.

So please vote and comment, thanks. I voted "Yes, obviously".
.

No.

You either have an authoritarian state or you do not....Varying degrees of relative authoritarian control are irrelevant.....You either have cancer or you do not.

Capitalism is an economic model, not a political one....Socialism is both political and economic.....Black markets (nearly pure capitalism) exist organically outside any form of authoritarian gubmint control.....In fact, such authoritarian tyranny is the root of them being "black" markets.

So let me get this straight, and tell me if I'm wrong.

First, the actual poll question does not bring up socialism. I'm taking about the size of government.

You said "more capitalist or less", and I made the point that capitalism is apolitical...Socialism was mentioned as a contrast.

You don't see anything on the planet in between the USA and Venezuela? Really?
.

Is the USA's gubmint authoritarian or not?....Do they rule by force or not?...Don't haggle over degrees, it's a yes or no question.

So evidently your answer is "no".

Okay, thanks.
.

Apparently, "no" is your answer as well.

 

[Rambunctious]

The bigger the government gets...the bigger it needs to be to support itself and all of its unconstitutional edicts....

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The food at your super market, is obviously a Capitalist system.

Hmm, hold on, there. The food at our supermarkets is both highly regulated and the target of subsidy programs that aim to control supply. So clearly, it is part of a mixed system.

 

[Oddball]

It's not an accurate description when people use The State to intervene..

Sure, sometimes, but that doesn't contradict my point in any way whatsoever.

Actually, it does....Using "sometimes" to try and carve out your particular exceptions is irrelevant.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I've been unable to get a straight answer from another poster on a different thread, so let's try this.

My position is that the size, scope, depth, breadth and authority of governments exist on a continuum. That a country can be, for example, "more" socialist or "less" socialist. "More" authoritarian or "less" authoritarian. "More" capitalist or "less" capitalist.

It seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess not to others.

So please vote and comment, thanks. I voted "Yes, obviously".
.

you can easily find your answer in the constitution,,,
its very clear about it

So you don't want to answer.

Got it.
.

there is no answer that includes the constitution,

So you don't want to answer.

Got it.
.

It is sort of funny to watch all the people that praise Trump for sending our tax dollars to the farmers turn around and whine about the Constitution.

Or the people that praised Trump's plan to use the Feds to deal with a states homeless problem turn around and whine about the Constitution.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's not an accurate description when people use The State to intervene..

Sure, sometimes, but that doesn't contradict my point in any way whatsoever.

Actually, it does....Using "sometimes" to try and carve out your particular exceptions is irrelevant.

No, it doesn't. Which is why you did not and cannot argue that it does.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No.

You either have an authoritarian state or you do not....Varying degrees of relative authoritarian control are irrelevant.....You either have cancer or you do not.

Terrible analogy. My mom has skin cancer and has had it for 30 years and it is treated on a regular basis.

Both of her sisters died of pancreatic cancer, there is no treating it and there is no living with it.

So, despite your lack of knowledge, even cancer comes in degrees.

 

[Oddball]

[
Yes of course it is a continuum in reality. In partisan politics it is an all or nothing slippery slope game. Our politics has devolved into demonizing, stereotyping, and fear mongering. A fair, honest, objective debate is few and far between. Drama is what drives ratings and emotions and that’s what the media and our leaders play off of. We need a disrupter who can find success using good old fashioned character and integrity and intellect. Something to change the tides because we are neck deep in some really ugly crap and sinking fast

Politics has always been about demonizing, stereotyping and fearmongering....The political discourse when Murica started was far more coarse than it is today.

Get a grip.

 

[Oddball]

No.

You either have an authoritarian state or you do not....Varying degrees of relative authoritarian control are irrelevant.....You either have cancer or you do not.

Terrible analogy. My mom has skin cancer and has had it for 30 years and it is treated on a regular basis.

Both of her sisters died of pancreatic cancer, there is no treating it and there is no living with it.

So, despite your lack of knowledge, even cancer comes in degrees.

Whether you survived the cancer or not is irrelevant...You either have it or you don't...The only way you in fact survive cancer is to eradicate it...You don't just trim around the edges.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No.

You either have an authoritarian state or you do not....Varying degrees of relative authoritarian control are irrelevant.....You either have cancer or you do not.

Terrible analogy. My mom has skin cancer and has had it for 30 years and it is treated on a regular basis.

Both of her sisters died of pancreatic cancer, there is no treating it and there is no living with it.

So, despite your lack of knowledge, even cancer comes in degrees.

Whether you survived the cancer or not is irrelevant...You either have it or you don't...The only way you in fact survive cancer is to eradicate it...You don't just trim around the edges.

People live with cancer for years and some people die from it in days. Even cancer has degrees. In cancer they are called stages.

 

[Slade3200]

[
Yes of course it is a continuum in reality. In partisan politics it is an all or nothing slippery slope game. Our politics has devolved into demonizing, stereotyping, and fear mongering. A fair, honest, objective debate is few and far between. Drama is what drives ratings and emotions and that’s what the media and our leaders play off of. We need a disrupter who can find success using good old fashioned character and integrity and intellect. Something to change the tides because we are neck deep in some really ugly crap and sinking fast

Politics has always been about demonizing, stereotyping and fearmongering....The political discourse when Murica started was far more coarse than it is today.

Get a grip.

I don’t find that excuse acceptable. Political battles have always been fought but there was also a common sense of service and respect and collaboration that was involved with governing... now it’s two sides where the others are the enemy. It’s dangerous and counter productive

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Here would be my answer:
Absolute power corrupts absolutely; the measure of corruption can be accurately measured by the level and concentration of power.

Let that sink in.
The beauty of the U.S. constitution is its division of power. Not only did it define and separate power, but it spread it out. Not just over 100's of people... but thousands.
Unfortunately, beginning with FDR, our federal government has increased it's power and influence way-way beyond what was intended by our constitution.
And therefore... corruption has increased.
Now.
I have an idea, lets give them even more power.
What was the definition of insanity again?

 

[Oddball]

[
Yes of course it is a continuum in reality. In partisan politics it is an all or nothing slippery slope game. Our politics has devolved into demonizing, stereotyping, and fear mongering. A fair, honest, objective debate is few and far between. Drama is what drives ratings and emotions and that’s what the media and our leaders play off of. We need a disrupter who can find success using good old fashioned character and integrity and intellect. Something to change the tides because we are neck deep in some really ugly crap and sinking fast

Politics has always been about demonizing, stereotyping and fearmongering....The political discourse when Murica started was far more coarse than it is today.

Get a grip.

I don’t find that excuse acceptable. Political battles have always been fought but there was also a common sense of service and respect and collaboration that was involved with governing... now it’s two sides where the others are the enemy. It’s dangerous and counter productive

What you find acceptable is irrelevant....Politics has always been a brutal game of character assassination....Nature of the beast.

Get over it.

 

[Slade3200]

[
Yes of course it is a continuum in reality. In partisan politics it is an all or nothing slippery slope game. Our politics has devolved into demonizing, stereotyping, and fear mongering. A fair, honest, objective debate is few and far between. Drama is what drives ratings and emotions and that’s what the media and our leaders play off of. We need a disrupter who can find success using good old fashioned character and integrity and intellect. Something to change the tides because we are neck deep in some really ugly crap and sinking fast

Politics has always been about demonizing, stereotyping and fearmongering....The political discourse when Murica started was far more coarse than it is today.

Get a grip.

I don’t find that excuse acceptable. Political battles have always been fought but there was also a common sense of service and respect and collaboration that was involved with governing... now it’s two sides where the others are the enemy. It’s dangerous and counter productive

What you find acceptable is irrelevant....Politics has always been a brutal game of character assassination....Nature of the beast.

Get over it.

I just stated otherwise. There was a time when members of the opposing parties worked together in much more frequency and decency than what’s happening today. That’s a fact, not my opinion. Why are you working so hard to make excuses for this partisan crap?

 

[Oddball]

Here would be my answer:
Absolute power corrupts absolutely; the measure of corruption can be accurately measured by the level and concentration of power.

Let that sink in.
The beauty of the U.S. constitution is its division of power. Not only did it define and separate power, but it spread it out. Not just over 100's of people... but thousands.

And even at that, people who lusted after power grew it outside its constitutional constraints, starting with the first president.

Unfortunately, beginning with FDR, our federal government has increased it's power and influence way-way beyond what was intended by our constitution.
And therefore... corruption has increased.
Now.
I have an idea, lets give them even more power.
What was the definition of insanity again?

It really began with Wilson, but the point is valid.

 

[Oddball]

I just stated otherwise. There was a time when members of the opposing parties worked together in much more frequency and decency than what’s happening today. That’s a fact, not my opinion. Why are you working so hard to make excuses for this partisan crap?

I'm not making excuses, I'm stating facts.

And those halcyon days of "working together in much more frequency and decency" gave us the unweildly, prohibitively expensive, and oppressive state we have today....When those assholes "work together" it's We the Peasants who take it in the ass.

 

[task0778]

Maybe there's some confusion over the use of the word 'continuum'. This country kinda wobbles back and forth like we did with Bush43, then Obama, and now Trump. Not much of a continuum here IMHO. And from time to time we lurch one way or the other, like we did right after 9/11. We're such a large country with such a wide diversity of people in every way possible, and our gov't kinda wobbles back and forth with the changing times.

In truth though, if you limit the discussion to just the size and scope of gov't, then it does appear like we're steadily moving in the direction of a larger and more invasive gov't. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. People say we'll never be like Venezuela; maybe so, but sometimes it fees like we're moving closer to being the next Soviet Union. Slowly, very slowly, but Presidents have been taking more and more control and that's not the way it was supposed to be.