Quote:
Originally Posted by KMA-628
Nope, I didn't agree to that.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMA-628
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
I believe that the government exists for whatever purpose the people see fit to use it for within the bounds of the constitution. "Big Government" is a boogeyman. Everyone hates big government until big government can help them.
|
I agree.
|
Then what exactly did you agree to? A boogeyman is an imaginary monster use to frighten children into compliance. I made a statement claiming that the big government argument is of the boogeyman variety. You agreed. Everyone hates big government until big government can help them. You agreed with me. I assume that you are a part of that big group consisting of everyone. Agreeing with me here implies a certain level of guilt in this on your behalf. Excuse me if i thought that you meant what you said.
Quote:
Wow, that's a classy way of calling me a liar.
Once again, I feel I have been very consistent with my views on big gov't. I don't support any increase to the size or scope of our gov't in almost any way that comes to my mind. That is not to say I won't ever support something, the possibility is always there. However, on the whole, I do not support it.
How many times do you want to go rounds on this? I have denied your accusation several times and your only response is to repeat the same accusation.
|
Once again, i apologize for assuming that you meant what you said.
Though i would be interested in how you define "big government". You say less government is better, and your standard seems to be based on the citizen's ability to get something done without the aid of the government. Is that not the basis for your opposition to the government involvement in the prohibition of public smoking? The citizens have it within their power to affect the market and bring about an end, or at the very least a decrease, in the amount of smoking allowed in public, correct?
Here's the thing. If that is the basis for your personal opinion as to whether a certain activity should justifiably require government help, well, then, that's not very strict criteria at all. In fact, i think that it could be argued that since it is the citizen who gives the government its power, that there is nothing the government can do that cannot also be accomplished by a sufficiently organized and motivated populace. Can you agree with me on that? Would this self empowered citizen group then essentially be a government, full of all the hugeness and bureaucracy that is inherent in any larger-than-small sized organization? Would that put us back where we started?
I see your distaste for big government, but i don't understand where you draw the line. I know you see the necessity of a big government for some things. If you admit that big government is at least in part a necessary thing, than how does it make sense to arbitrarily denounce something solely because it represents an increase in the size of government?