Government is not a choice. Government is a necessity.

[kentuck]

As Republicans stroll along the streets singing about the evils of "big government", it has never been more obvious that we need our "government" to fix the massive problem with unemployment in this country. We do not need that many unemployed. Why should we care?

People need jobs because jobs can add meaning to their lives. But let's face the truth: The private sector is not going to fix our roads, they are not going to re-build our bridges. They are not going to repair our infrastructure on their own. It's just too big of a job to undertake. That is why we have to have government take the lead in rebuilding our infrastructure.

But, of course, the government can do nothing if the private sector is not involved. For example, if there is a bridge that needs repaired or built, the government does not stop people on the street and ask if they "know how to build a bridge"??

Government goes to the existing private sector, including small construction companies, and take bids for the jobs that need to be done. The private sector benefits from their work and their hiring others to work for them. Government leads but government is not taking the profit from the infrastructure that benefits us all. That is how government serves us all, regardless of your Party affiliation.

[NoOneMan]

1. We could probably get along just fine with it

And without big business. The two need each other to maximize their exploitation of humans.

[1-Old-Man]

4. Governments build roads and bridges and enforce contracts. How you gonna do without those things?

[kentuck]

5. We can't unless...

...we want our country to fall apart. What American does not want good roads, good bridges, and good schools? It's not about Democrat vs Republican. It's about what kind of country we want and who's going to fix our roads and bridges and who is going to solve the unemployment problem? That is what we want our government to do. Because we understand that the private sector cannot undertake such a huge national jobs program. However, the government can lead without taking the profits of the private sector companies. And that is an important point: It is the private sector that benefits. In the process, we all benefit, because we get to drive on new roads and bridges and it was done by the American people, Democrats and Republicans, all Americans.

[NoOneMan]

7. We can't afford all those jobs, bridges and roads you speak of

In terms of the carbon cost, that is. Unless you have a magic solution to lower the carbon intensity of the energy required for it all to just about nil immediately (not in some far off Star Trekian, "Popular Science-esque" future that never pans out), sounds like the utopia you speak of it is a death knell for the earth (if there hasn't already been many ringing in succession).

[NoOneMan]

6. Walk

Its not rocket science.

I really enjoy walking.

[kentuck]

8. Yes, park that car...

...and walk to the nearest cave you call home...?

[NoOneMan]

9. Why not?

Cars suck. Subterranean homes are incredibly energy efficient and have proven their value for a hundred thousand years

[kentuck]

10. I'm not trying to minimize your point...

But I don't think most people are ready to make such a big change? They like the conveniences. They like their cars but they don't like to drive over potholes and unsafe bridges.

[NoOneMan]

11. Who cares what people want?

You are polishing a turd for them. You can't have your wondering products of earth exploitation without having your earth exploitation too.

Your shiny future that you advocate is a future of death. Its a friendlier car to drive off the cliff in. Why should I give a fuck what flavor of insanity "most people" are ready for anymore? Whatever flavor of destruction you order, it all tastes the same at the end of the day.

So I am trying to minimize your point. You are talking to people already in a 10K year rabbit hole on the premise that they already accept everything around us (business, growth, government, exploitation) as necessary. Its not. We were here before that shit. We may not be here after it if we can't figure out there are other viable ways to live that don't include building bridges and burning energy.

[kentuck]

13. Who cares what people want??

Really? That is the definition of democracy. The will of the people.

I can appreciate the passion within your fatalism but I fear that the majority would disagree with you?

People simply are not ready to go cold turkey, even though they know most of shit around them is killing them. Ted Kyczynski thought similarly.

[NoOneMan]

18. Democracy?

Mutually agreed destruction via ecocide from short-sighted drones afflicted by the discount factor is a sacred, unquestionable tenant?

I hardly care anymore about democracy and whatever shiny Camelot ideal you want to throw out there. I have no irrational belief in its benevolence than I have in a God that doesn't exist. These are all rabbit hole ideas and this rabbit hole is a cess pit that is failing us. Democracy is just the Tyranny of the mind-controlled earth exploiting majority against all living creatures. Doesn't sound so hot.

[kentuck]

19. It's the worst system in the world...

except for all the others.

What kind of utopia do you imagine people living in? Peace and tranquility everywhere. Perhaps you are thinking Anarchy? Perhaps you are thinking "no government at all"? Who buries the dead?

[NoOneMan]

21. Thats the worst cliche in the world...

Forget about Utopia. If it ever was possible that ship has sailed. One thing I guarantee you, no matter how friendly you magic government is: when the acidity kills the oceans, the aquifiers run dry, the temperature rises +5C, the potash is depleted and the agricultural fields become dust, a million shiny new bridges and the best healthcare system in the world wont quell worldwide pain, depravity and chaos.

I don't envision a utopia as an alternative. I would like to be left the fuck alone so I don't have to keep contributing the the shithouse before it collapses on us. I'd prefer the people in charge let everyone know what is really happening so that "the people" can make real decisions about their future (whether to ride it out with the technophiles and starve or develop resilience against the 6th extinction). Because every minute you toil and every dime you pay in taxes at this point is a minute and a dime wasted if you are going to live past the next 30 years.

You tell me about what people want, as they ride blindly into a storm, bought into a civilization bubble on the precipice of disaster. I care no more about their wishes than I do for children in a candy store (on fire).

Big government and big growth and big jobs aren't the future. Slow decay is the future because we can never maintain, much less grow, against the environmental destruction that is about to be unleashed. If we have any future, it will be in small, independent, resilient local groups that work together to ensure people are safe, have access to water and fed (locally with many levels of failover). The paradigm is shifting. People need to get with it or its not going to work out for them. The problems of the 21st century cannot be defeated with tired cliched political talking points of yesteryear.

BTW, the same type of people will be around to bury the dead as there were around to take care of mentally disabled people before government existed:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2009/03/30/deformed-skull-of-prehistoric-child-suggests-that-early-humans-cared-for-disabled-children/#.Uau7dqqxukI

[kentuck]

22. I would agree it is a cliche...

But I don't think your solutions would work? (whatever they are?)

So, you don't care what people think because you know better? "You tell me about what people want, as they ride blindly into a storm, bought into a civilization bubble on the precipice of disaster. I care no more about their wishes than I do for children in a candy store (on fire)."

That is admirable that you are so confident that you have the answers.

Unfortunately, we cannot fix any of the problems you mention without a strong government that can enforce the laws on the big corporate polluters, etc. I suppose we could call the Deputy Barney Fife to take care of it? But even he would be too much authority in your world, I suppose?

In fact, your ideas would probably lead to a quicker demise, in my humble opinion.

This is not to say that there are not life-threatening issues that we need to face, including carbon pollution. But we need to fix it as a country, not depend on each individual to stop doing everything he is accustomed to doing. Greed would win in short hand and the world would be a more horrific and painful place to live. Another tired cliche: Either we fight together or we will hang separately.

[NoOneMan]

24. The government has all the opportunity to "fix" our problems

Its just not politically viable for them and it will never happen.

The "fix" isn't to do more. Its to do less. The "fix" isn't to build more but to make sure we can all be comfortable and survive with less. The "fix" isn't to create a government to take care of everyone, but to empower local organizations to leverage their own resources to provide local security and resilience. And if those this don't work, we are all fucked anyway.

Hell, between you and me, we are just fucked no matter what. Its gone. You just can't see it yet. We will never reorganize the economy because its not politically feasible. We will never build resilience because its like admitting this whole 10K year experiment has failed. We are just going to sit here toiling away and whistling into the wind until all this shit is slowly taken from us and we wake up to see where we are (starving, decaying and dying with iPads).

So yeah, I don't have a solution (my best shot was moving to a decent place without crime, climate woes, overpopulation, or too much disaster potential on an island in another country). Most people's solution will be buying into fake ideals until they starve (not to be crass, this sounds like yours). All in all, that doesn't solve anything for the globe because our global problems are not solvable unless you consider poisoning our atmosphere with sulphates a solution. So Im just throwing this out there for those seeking a personal solution and an alternative to the obsolete, distraction of socialism vs corporatism debate. Some of us younger people are realizing a lot of that crap just doesn't matter anymore because we've been left a dying world we have to raise our children in.

BTW, you are wondering what Im talking about...check out http://www.transitionnetwork.org/

[kentuck]

25. I believe in people being self-sufficient...

and less materialistic. I love working in my garden and growing my own vegetables. I am too old to hunt anymore. I would probably get eaten by a bear.

I have thought of moving off the grid. Drinking my own well water and living off the land. No automobiles, no television, and no Internet. Who needs government anyway?

But we are destroying the world, you say. Yes, we have always been destroying the world. We just have a better capacity to do it now than when all we had to clean up was horse shit.

No one man is going to be able to snap his fingers and change the world. We have to change the way people think and, unfortunately, we cannot do that without modern technology.

[NoOneMan]

26. Honestly, it doesn't really matter what people think, en masse.

The carbon is in the pipe. Its change or die. If people aren't going to adapt, more resources for me post-bottleneck (or my children if I'm 50 years early)

You don't have to move off the grid....there is no community there. I guess people need community. Humans have always sought it out, for better or worse. But maybe we need to get communities ready to live without a grid, or less of one. Or form new micro-communities for people who don't want to starve to death.

Im not here to change the world. Its too late for that. I'd be happy if maybe a person or two started a garden instead of sending out checks to political organizations who cant take a chip out of the biggest existential threat mankind has ever faced (which is not the lack of bridges).



Good to know you are a gardener

[kentuck]

27. I do not disagree with goals for community.

Only the means. I would agree with you that we are destroying the world. The latest carbon parts per million report suggests we may be well on our way. But electrical cars are better than gasoline engines for those that cannot go cold turkey. Windmills and water power are better than coal-fired plants for power.

We are a materialistic world and I would not be surprised that in the not-so-distant future water will be more valuable than gold. We will cut down a tree so we can make a sign saying that the rain forest is disappearing, not realizing or caring that every tree supplies a balance of oxygen to our gasping world.

Sooner than we will know, we will be like Mars - uninhabitable. The polar caps and icebergs will melt, creating flooding and climate change unheard or unseen in our recorded history. Then, when there is no more ice to melt to lift the oceans, then the water will begin to evaporate. It could happen faster than any experts can imagine, in my opinion.

That is my happy note for today.

[Major Nikon]

34. Nobody would read your posts on the internet either

So there's that.

Just sayin'

[bhikkhu]

2. And government needs to be the "right size" as well

if you look at what happened after the revolutionary war, we established first a "small" government system. The economy languished for years, the French and the Spanish took advantage of our inability to regulate our economy or trade. There wasn't war because there was no need - they could take what they wanted, their governments had the organization, the size and the ability to analyze a situation, form a plan and follow through with it for the advantage of their citizens. Ours didn't - it was small and powerless in comparison.

Similarly, you could say that China through over the last twenty years (though not so much lately) had a larger and more effective government; in trade and economic matters, it ate our lunch. It was big enough and organized enough to form a comprehensive plan and put it into action, while our smaller and less organized government was ineffective at recognizing what was happening or responding. They acted deliberately and took a great deal, while we're still confusedly pointing fingers every which way.

A nation has to have a government that is the right size in comparison with its neighbors and partners and competitors, and the right size to manage its own infrastructure and economy.

[kentuck]

3. And a voting populace...

that is educated enough to know what is happening.

[former9thward]

14. China is a terrible example for your point.

China, since Mao, has always had a much bigger government than the U.S. Its government was utterly ineffective. Its economy was in shambles and tens of millions died of starvation because of government boondoggles such as the Great Leap Forward. It was only after Mao died and Deng allowed a form of capitalism that the Chinese economy took off.

[bhikkhu]

20. Mao was an idiot. But this is what I was looking at:

http://www.american.com/graphics/2007/january/q-a-trade-deficit/Chinas%20Portion%20of%20the%20US%20Trade%20Deficit%20(large).JPG

leading to this:



while the US is more like this:



Not to begrudge or pick on China, but they are a stunning example of the success a centralized government with a strong and deliberate policy, consistently applied over time. The US, on the other hand, seems more like a ship without a rudder, where policies come and go like ad campaigns, with about as much substance.

[kentuck]

23. They are only reaching wage equilibrium.

Which is the wet dream of the world capitalists.

[bhikkhu]

31. I would have thought the opposite - that they would dream of perpetual inequality

such that there would always be another low-wage haven to flee to for cheap labor. Currently, from what I have heard, that sort of capitalist has apparently colonized Bangladesh, having fled China.

[kentuck]

33. Wages are going down in some places but going up in others.

The equilibrium will be at a very low standard. They will always look for cheaper labor but this seems to me to be what they are doing. Specialized markets, as were once in the US, will be at the same price for labor in many countries, such as China and India. I could be wrong on this?

[Fire Walk With Me]

12. Stop believing in authority, start believing in yourself. n/t

[kentuck]

16. I try to be a realist.

What would you suggest we do with 14 million unemployed people? If the private sector cannot supply the work, does the government have any responsibility?

[Fire Walk With Me]

29. You are still looking to failed authority. What are YOUR ideas and solutions? n/t

[kentuck]

30. What failed authority am I looking to?

My post was about the necessity of government.

[Fire Walk With Me]

32. You are not making the implied connection that government is the failed authority?

Most obviously, new methods and systems are required. Stop looking to the very system which either cannot solve those problems, or benefits from their very existence. What again are your ideas, yours personally, regarding how we may begin addressing these issues? Have you sought out like-minded individuals for discussion and organization? Power lies in groups determined to address an issue.

[Puzzledtraveller]

35. Yes!

I've been a government worker for nearly 20 years, and I tell people this. Government is not a person, it has no feelings, no sympathy or empathy, it is not a master nor should it be viewed as one. I know that's not what the OP is saying but I have no more faith in government than I do in a supreme being.

[LadyHawkAZ]

15. They only "stroll along the streets

singing about the evils of "big government"" until they stick their foot in a pothole and trip. Then they DEMAND to know why the government hasn't fixed the street yet.

Complaints about "Big Gubmint!!1!" are a great big sack of horse manure and they know it. What they really mean by that is "I want to be able to legally do anything I want, but I want the government to regulate things I don't personally like"- exactly the way society is not supposed to work.

[kentuck]

17. Dare we say?

Government is not the problem - government is the solution.

[Pragdem]

28. Order and organization are necessary. Government is important in providing them.

As are organizations in the business world that set uniform rules and guidelines for various industries.

Society is the perpetual experimentation of organizing chaos. Democracy has been the most successful framework in doing that.