So how much Gov is 2 much Gov?

How about we start dismantling government one piece at a time until we miss it.

That's a brilliant idea.

Except for the fact that different people will miss different things.

Since I never fly I won't miss the part of the government that keeps our commercial airfleet flying.

Since I don't have much cash in the bank I won't miss FDIC.

Since I don't have young children I won't miss Head Start.

Since nobody is invading my home I won't miss the military.

There's all kinds of things my government does that don't help me, much.

Let's start with those first, okay?


terrific point. The problem is that some people are living under the delusion that their own personal circumstances are the only thing government should adapt itself to.

Others take a less ego-centric view and understand that there are many others who don't share this particular set of circumstances and it's THEIR government too.
 
I would say what we have now is too much.
I can understand this sentiment, but I think maybe the problem with a lot of people is that they believe that government has grown in the "wrong" directions.

For instance a lot of people who say government is too big, actually advocate MORE government intervention into things like border control and LESS government involvement in things like healthcare and economic recovery.
 
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

Rights come from God ,
 
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

Rights come from God ,

only if you believe (as I do) that God is our creator. Our government is also charged with serving folks who believe "their creator" is just their mom and dad.
 
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

Rights come from God ,

only if you believe (as I do) that God is our creator. Our government is also charged with serving folks who believe "their creator" is just their mom and dad.

youre missing the boat, rights come from God, not from government...if you dont believe in God then there is no force that can take your rights away since no force gives them to you, neither God nor government. if God gives them to you he is the only one who can take them from you. in both instances the government is incapable of giving or taking rights since both man and God are superior to government. In both instances government is subject to man and not man to government.
 
youre missing the boat, rights come from God, not from government...if you dont believe in God then there is no force that can take your rights away since no force gives them to you, neither God nor government. if God gives them to you he is the only one who can take them from you. in both instances the government is incapable of giving or taking rights since both man and God are superior to government. In both instances government is subject to man and not man to government.

So your argument is that if you don't believe in God, then you have no rights? If that is what you are saying I have to disagree.

"Give unto Caesar what id Caesar's. Give unto God what is God."

My belief is that God has no interest in civil authority - he demands spiritual authority. (Which is more binding imho) I don't think he cares whether or not his laws are written into our constitution, he wants them written in our hearts.
 
See, I feel like that is a silly question. There is no doubt such a concept as "too much government" exists but that only exists as a function of how representative said government is to the people it is meant to represent. The boundaries that government may take are only should only be a function of how representative, responsive, and transparent it is towards the people it is meant to represent. There is no 'absolute value' of "big government"- a government that is extremely representative, responsive, and transparent can be extremely 'bigger' than one that is not. That isn't to say that that can change with a simple election- represetnativeness, responsiveness, and transparency can only increase with increased struggle and pressure from the populance; not from slogans and propaganda.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

That is exactly WHY we have a CONSTITUTION to protect from the tyranny of popular whim and a 'majority' simply voting to take advantage of the minority populace by taking away the individual rights afforded to the citizens of this country
 
youre missing the boat, rights come from God, not from government...if you dont believe in God then there is no force that can take your rights away since no force gives them to you, neither God nor government. if God gives them to you he is the only one who can take them from you. in both instances the government is incapable of giving or taking rights since both man and God are superior to government. In both instances government is subject to man and not man to government.

So your argument is that if you don't believe in God, then you have no rights? If that is what you are saying I have to disagree.

good god, reading comprehension is your friend stop dissing it. go back and re-read until you get it right.
 
Thanks.

So are saying that you feel the force, the impact, and the value of our "real" rights have been diluted by the "invention" of "illegitimate" rights?
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

So is what you are saying that you feel the force, the impact, and the value of our "real" rights have been diluted by the "invention" of "illegitimate" rights?

If this is not an accurate reflection of your position, could you please clarify?

If it is an accurate reflection, would you give me a few examples of what you feel some of the real rights are and what some of the imagined rights are?
 
Since the left wing has no problem that I have seen with
Cap and trade,
Health care regulation
Acorn becoming part of the government
A line item in the stimulus package - under the heading "neighborhood stabilization activities" - sets aside $4.19 billion for low-income advocacy groups such as ACORN.
Tarp spending
Bail outs and
neo-facsim .
I want to know how much government is to much and what is a fair federal tax rate for a family of 3 making 50,000 dollars a year?

What shouldn't the Government do for people ?

Thanks?

Liberal answer: Governments can do anything they want except wiretap terrorist's phone calls...
 
Thanks.

So are saying that you feel the force, the impact, and the value of our "real" rights have been diluted by the "invention" of "illegitimate" rights?
I believe the cavalier way government spends money has a negative affect on my pursuits and liberty, I believe UHC will have a negative effect on life.
 
Thanks.

So are saying that you feel the force, the impact, and the value of our "real" rights have been diluted by the "invention" of "illegitimate" rights?
I believe the cavalier way government spends money has a negative affect on my pursuits and liberty, I believe UHC will have a negative effect on life.

Ok, I hear you. The imagined right of government to spend money has a negative impact on your real right to liberty?
And UHC (an imagined right for all to receive health care) will have a negative impact on your life?

I don't see the connections. Can you explain how?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top