Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We have been down this road before. Low information lefties try to tell us that small government advocates want yada yada dirty water (and outlawing alcohol?) . The Founding Fathers spelled out the duty of the federal government in a single sentence "to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare". Nobody ever thought back then that the federal government would become a gigantic unwieldy bureaucratic nightmare consisting of thousands of often competing small bureaucracies often with little or nothing to do but act as employment agencies. You have to be a complete idiot not to think the federal government needs to be cut down to a more efficient operation subject to the control of the people. Pot heads have a fantasy that enforcement of drug laws is too expensive and the Military is better equipped than it needs to be but it's just a pipe dream. The opposite is true.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces
Nope, I want to slash it by 1/3 to 1/2, close all permanent overseas based and make it defensive focused
* They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage.
Technically true, but completely misleading. I want to end all government marriage, straight and gay
* They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
Nope, all drugs should be legal
* In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
I'm not gay or into recreational drugs either
* Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Yes, you're for big government, you're clear on that
*Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute
Liberals love to talk about handouts, but you hate to define what it means. tax cuts when we are still paying way more than our share are not "handouts." Government allowing corporations to deduct their expenses are not "handouts." Define what you mean by this.
* Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
Clearly a bunch of us on the site do
I said "most people", not "all people".
You said "nope" and then spoke about yourself. Clearly you are not enough to make it to the "most" part.
So, I could look at what you, as an individual think, but this isn't what most people think.
What I mean by govt giving money to corporations would be something like:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/12/01/us/government-incentives.html?_r=1&#TX
Texas, for example, gives $19 billion a year on "incentive programs" for businesses. That's $759 dollars on average per person.
$277 million goes to Amazon. Why the feck does Amazon need Texas to pay it that much money? Seriously, why?
I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
Conservatives, libertarians, and most others on the right also have this ridiculous, inconsistent perception of what constitutes 'government.'
They bemoan the 'evils' of the Federal government, while at the same time take no issue with state and local governments seeking to deny citizens their rights, when in fact state and local governments exhibit the greater likelihood of indeed violating citizens' rights.
It was state and local governments who fought to retain segregation.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny citizens their right to counsel.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny interracial couples their right to marry.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny women their right to privacy.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny immigrants their right to due process.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny gay Americans their right to equal protection of the law.
It was state and local governments who fought to criminalize homosexuality in violation of the 14th Amendment.
It was state and local governments who fought to deny gay Americans their right to enter into marriage contracts.
And these are but a few examples of how state and local governments sought to violate the fundamental, inalienable rights and protected liberties of each American, where not only did conservatives, libertarians, and most others on the right fail to take issue with such violations, but actually supported and facilitated these and other violations of citizens' civil rights.
So much for 'small government' conservatives.
So your theory is that without government the poor cannot be "helped"? how do you define "helping" the poor?About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
It depends on what you mean by smaller government. Our general government is bigger than any Firm in the private sector by comparison.I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
That has never been the governments main dutySmall government lets industry dump anything they want into our air or water
Big government let's big government start endless wars, grow more govt, create massive social programs, rack up never ending debt etc.
About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Where have conservatives ever complained about big government meaning we have the largest military in world history?
The govts main duty is the protection of its citizens. First and foremost and no that doesn't mean never ending spending or wars. It's too bad that you can't be that honest on all of the worthless social programs that do nothing for the citizens.
So your theory is that without government the poor cannot be "helped"? how do you define "helping" the poor?About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Do the distribution effects of inflation "help" the poor?
how about a regulatory regime that raises the cost of everything that they need, does that help them?
What about all the carnage and suffering wrought by government initiated wars, that making their lives any better?
How about public education systems which cannot even teach them the basics, is that assisting them in any way to becoming NOT POOR?
What about the welfare state which is designed to keep them at subsistence level and nothing more, that helping?
If government is so damn good at "helping" the poor, why are their any poor people left at all? shouldn't they all be at least self sufficient members of the middle class by now?
That has never been the governments main dutySmall government lets industry dump anything they want into our air or water
Big government let's big government start endless wars, grow more govt, create massive social programs, rack up never ending debt etc.
About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Where have conservatives ever complained about big government meaning we have the largest military in world history?
The govts main duty is the protection of its citizens. First and foremost and no that doesn't mean never ending spending or wars. It's too bad that you can't be that honest on all of the worthless social programs that do nothing for the citizens.
Social Programs do more for our citizens than the military does
That has never been the governments main dutySmall government lets industry dump anything they want into our air or water
Big government let's big government start endless wars, grow more govt, create massive social programs, rack up never ending debt etc.
About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Where have conservatives ever complained about big government meaning we have the largest military in world history?
The govts main duty is the protection of its citizens. First and foremost and no that doesn't mean never ending spending or wars. It's too bad that you can't be that honest on all of the worthless social programs that do nothing for the citizens.
Social Programs do more for our citizens than the military does
No shit Sherlock, they can get away with that because of big government advocates LIKE YOU, congratulations your unwavering support for the expansion of government expense and power has resulted in exactly the thing you claim to be against, got any other negative unintended consequences you'd like to inflict on the rest of society?So your theory is that without government the poor cannot be "helped"? how do you define "helping" the poor?About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Do the distribution effects of inflation "help" the poor?
how about a regulatory regime that raises the cost of everything that they need, does that help them?
What about all the carnage and suffering wrought by government initiated wars, that making their lives any better?
How about public education systems which cannot even teach them the basics, is that assisting them in any way to becoming NOT POOR?
What about the welfare state which is designed to keep them at subsistence level and nothing more, that helping?
If government is so damn good at "helping" the poor, why are their any poor people left at all? shouldn't they all be at least self sufficient members of the middle class by now?
We spend trillions on the military yet still have wars. It never seems to end
Yeah what's your objective? Get half of 'em out of poverty and just fuck the rest of 'em? Or is it something more sinister, like for example; give 'em just enough help to survive but not so much that they might actually be able to support themselves?Yet you seem to think the war on poverty can result in a victory where there are no more poor people.
Wait you blame the failure of the governments "war on poverty" on people that manage to create jobs in spite of all the roadblocks that government places in their way? Exactly what alternate dimension do you exist in?You want to place blame for the failure of the war on poverty?
Blame the job creators
That has never been the governments main dutySmall government lets industry dump anything they want into our air or water
Big government let's big government start endless wars, grow more govt, create massive social programs, rack up never ending debt etc.
About what I thought
Small Government means not helping the poor
Where have conservatives ever complained about big government meaning we have the largest military in world history?
The govts main duty is the protection of its citizens. First and foremost and no that doesn't mean never ending spending or wars. It's too bad that you can't be that honest on all of the worthless social programs that do nothing for the citizens.
Social Programs do more for our citizens than the military does
Social engineering does more damage. We were fine without it for 170 years.
Why stop at 72%? is there something magical about that number?big ol government .. lets whittle it down 72% like Ben Carson wants to do shall we?
.
Why stop at 72%? is there something magical about that number?big ol government .. lets whittle it down 72% like Ben Carson wants to do shall we?
.
Why stop at 72%? is there something magical about that number?big ol government .. lets whittle it down 72% like Ben Carson wants to do shall we?
.
Carsons #, ask him.
The "beast" is the one percentIt should not be about "starving the beast" but about lowering our tax burden through simplification of Government.
in this case it is Government. we could be lowering our tax burden.The "beast" is the one percentIt should not be about "starving the beast" but about lowering our tax burden through simplification of Government.
