Why We Need Less, Not More, Government

[xsited1]

This is in response to the following thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/176062-why-we-need-more-not-less-government.html#post3881880

When I saw this thread, I thought it was a joke. Then I remembered we are living in the Obama-age. Anyway, somebody at LewRockwell.com saw the site referenced in the thread a couple years ago and decided to write about it. Funny.

After years of writing about how governments abuse, murder, and imprison innocent people and destroy life around the world, I find that I have been wrong, really wrong. All this time, I wrongfully tried to convince readers that terrible things are done in the name of “good government,” and now I have to apologize to them.

Why this turnaround? I have seen the light. Government is good, yes, very, very good. How do I know this? Why Douglas J. Amy, a professor of politics at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts (an island of True Political Correctness in America's Most Politically-Correct State) has opened a world of Truth and Beauty to me with his website, Government Is Good.

You see, until I read this wonderful site praising the Great Accomplishments and Missions of Government (or at least government when run by the Democratic Party), I had no idea that government constantly did wonderful things for me. I was ungrateful, but no more!

For example, did you know that if it were not for government, your house would burn down if you turned on the lights, as those wicked, profit-seeking homebuilders and electricians would wire your house in a sloppy manner that immediately would start a conflagration that would kill you and your family?

...

More here: Government Is Good, Don’cha Know by William L. Anderson

 

[Antiderivative]

I have read that before. This part makes me laugh everytime.

Why did the U.S.S.R. go the way of the Assyrian Empire? Let the good professor explain:

…our rights depend heavily on an active and well-funded government. When governments find themselves in a position where they can't effectively tax and spend as has sometimes been the case in countries in the former Soviet Union citizen rights and liberties become unenforceable and largely non-existent.​

I had no idea that the real reason that Stalin murdered millions of people and enslaved hundreds of millions more was because he and his minions could not “effectively tax and spend.”

 

[KissMy]

Government negligence & incompetence is what destroyed the economy. Government gives a false sense of security that allows criminals to prey upon its citizens who have let down their guard trusting in the security of their government.

How many criminals has the SEC jailed over the past 10 years? How many in the last 20 years? - The answer is 1.

Now - How many high priced government employees does the SEC have with fat ass pensions for life? The answer is 3,748 costing us $1.4 Billion a year or $376,000 per employee per year.

Are you getting your monies worth? Hell No!!! Not unless you are Bernie Madoff.

 

[xsited1]

I have read that before. This part makes me laugh everytime.

Why did the U.S.S.R. go the way of the Assyrian Empire? Let the good professor explain:

…our rights depend heavily on an active and well-funded government. When governments find themselves in a position where they can't effectively tax and spend as has sometimes been the case in countries in the former Soviet Union citizen rights and liberties become unenforceable and largely non-existent.​

I had no idea that the real reason that Stalin murdered millions of people and enslaved hundreds of millions more was because he and his minions could not “effectively tax and spend.”

I'm amazed at how easily led people are into believe such nonsense. Here's another great article from the same site:

More Government Won't Help by Ron Paul

 

[ShackledNation]

I loved this part:

(You see, companies only profit when they kill or maim their customers, or put prices so high that they cannot sell many of their goods. It is government that provides our goods for free because government is so far-seeing and so wise that it knows how to take scarce goods the turn them into free goods without causing any economic dislocations. After all, everyone who believes in the wonder and goodness of government knows that the Law of Scarcity was made up by evil people who think government is bad.)

Excellent articles. And in response those pro-big government will just reiterate the same talking points already refuted ad nauseam.

 

[waltky]

Bad job well done...

SEC Awards $1,200 Bonus to Employee Who Twice Failed to Uncover Madoff Fraud, IG Says
Friday, August 12, 2011 - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a $1,200 bonus in 2010 to an SEC employee who played a key role in two investigations that failed to uncover investment counselor Bernie Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

What’s more, the bonus was given for the employee’s contribution to a 2009 SEC investigation probing why the SEC had failed to uncover Madoff’s scheme – a report in which the agency’s inspector general (IG) had recommended that the very same employee and others be disciplined for “failures in performance” related to Madoff. In a report released August 2, SEC Inspector General H. David Kotz disclosed that during a general review of SEC bonuses earlier this year, his staff uncovered the fact that one of the key participants in both a 2005 examination and a 2006 investigation of Madoff had received the $1,200 cash award in April 2010. “The narrative justification for the award indicated that it was made, in part, to reward the employee’s efforts in 2009 pertaining to a follow-on investigation of Madoff,” the IG wrote.

Madoff, whose decades-long bilking of thousands of investors was exposed in 2008, pleaded guilty in March 2009 to 11 felony counts for operating a mammoth scam. The 2009 SEC follow-on investigation, which came after Madoff pleaded guilty, was a probe into why the securities regulatory agency hadn’t caught Madoff to begin with. “In August 2009, we completed our investigation of the SEC’s failure to uncover Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scheme,” IG Kotz noted in his new report. “We found that the examinations and investigations of Madoff and/or his firm were generally conducted by inexperienced personnel, were not planned adequately, and were too limited in scope,” he wrote. “We further found that the SEC examiners and investigators failed to understand the complexities of Madoff’s trading and the importance of verifying his returns with independent third parties. “As a result, we recommended in our investigative report that the Chairman share with management the portions of the investigation that related to performance failures by employees who still worked at the SEC and that appropriate action, including performance-based action, be taken on an employee-by-employee basis.”

But in the 2009 report, the inspector general himself had recommended that the employee in question, who is not identified, should be subject to possible disciplinary action – a fact which the IG cited in his latest report. The award was subsequent to that report. “The award nomination was signed by the employee’s Branch Chief and Assistant Regional Director on September 14, 2009, just two weeks after the August 31, 2009, issuance of the OIG’s final investigative report on the Commission’s failure to uncover the Madoff Ponzi scheme,” the IG noted. “Moreover, both the employee being rewarded and the Assistant Regional Director who recommended the award were cited in the report for numerous performance issues and were subject to potential disciplinary action at the time the award recommendation was made,” Kotz stated.

According to the IG, the SEC postponed payment of the award to the employee until April 25, 2010, after the SEC received a report from Fortney & Scott, the law firm the SEC had hired “to review performance issues identified in the OIG’s Madoff report and to advise the Commission concerning any personnel or disciplinary responses that might be warranted based on that report.” The inspector general noted that Fortney & Scott had concluded that the employee’s actions “did not warrant formal disciplinary action.” “However, the Fortney & Scott report did not dispute the serious performance issues pertaining to the employee raised in our report, including the fact that the 2005 examination of Madoff in which the employee had played a critical role was inappropriately focused, conducted without obtaining critical independent data, closed with unresolved issues remaining, and relied too heavily on the representations of Madoff,” the IG wrote.

Source