Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
@rune:
Government doesn't tell people how to spend; government is a democratically elected body that is empowered by the public to manage public spending to ensure it can thrive.
.
|
oh.. so all these idiotic carbon taxes.. sin taxes... are the government just managing public spending..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
"People are lazy and stubborn" is an incredibly general statement. I'm sorry you think that. Personally, I think some people are lazy and stubborn, while others are industrious and energetic, and a list of many interesting characteristics.
.
|
perfect.
and the industriour, energetic memebers of society should not have to care for the lazy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
"My money is my money. You can have some of it if i'm nice." Are you opposed to the idea of society?
.
|
no. not at all. society is wonderful. why is everyone (your) idea of society me giving away my money?
society is a group of people benefitting from each other. those benefits arise in numerous ways which do not include wealth redistribution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
I have not spend a great length of time in the U.S. I am generally pleased with the health-care system here, though I haven't used it as much as others, but I generally support it because a healthy public is a thriving public. From what I understand, however, it could use more funding and/or better efficiency. It's not perfect, but it works.
.
|
and I'm from Canada. Our healthcare system is pretty poor. Oh hey, they built a giant new clinic but couldn't put anything in it! Hooray. It's not perfect but it works isn't really a reasonable excuse to me. A few branches and some twigs keeps the rain off your head but it sure isn't a roof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
We do have poor and homeless. I can't think of many places that don't. Many of us want to do more to fight poverty, especially amongst children. As far as innovation and free enterprise is concerned, Canada has been home to much of it. I could provide examples, but I don't have much time at the moment. Canada has been a fair contributor in this respect, I can assure you.
.
|
good. up with people who (genuinely) care about stuff
the ultimate end point of this thread is a moral/personal issue.
some people are
okay with the government sticking its head in everything you do.
others are strongly against this.
and frankly there is sufficient economic evidence to say eitherside works (sort of)... at achieving what they want.
it's difficult because both sides are arguing correct facts. It's like arguing what's cooler the Sun or Ferraris.
WELL THE SUN IS REALLY HOT AND BIG
WELL FERRARIS ARE FAST AND RED
BUT THE SUN IS FULL OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS
YEA SO WHAT FERRARIS MAKE A NEAT SOUND
the hardworker- regardless of how fruitful they are, should not be required (coerced) to compromise his work, illegitamize his labour- in order to support those who are lazy or make bad choices. I don't ask to get bailed out when i punch a whole through my window and the rain comes in.
Money gets lost in government pockets, wasted on red tape, wasted on useless projects. Burned spinning gears without a clutch.
If there was some convincing evidence (of which there is not) that every cent in taxes I pay went towards job creation, temporary employment insurance (even some cases of maternity leave) etc etc.. then I wouldn't be so indignant.
Hard work... hell,
any work should be rewarded.
Use should be proportional with what you pay. Or... vice versa. I like cookies a whole lot more than my neighbour, so clearly, I'm going to take alot more from the jar. But that's okay under any sort of socialist thinking, even if i didn't bake a single cookie to contribute. It's the ultimate politics of entitlement. Everyone is allowed access to everything, regardless of their contribution.
Sharing is great. Collectivism is great. But it needs to arise spontaneously and voluntarily. If me and my fellow farmers from the area want to get together and share, trade, form some sort of collective- awesome. It will help with our marketing, magnify our profits, increase turnover, decrease transportation costs and share knowledge and labour to make our jobs easier. Sounds wonderful.
It is. It's fantastic.
But it's not if it's mister prime minister coming in telling us we
have to.
You just can't force a good thing.
I'm not speaking in favour of anarcho-capitalism. I support
a government. I think they are very important. I also think certain taxes are fine.
But when it comes to taking my money for the sake of.... potentially providing for someone else (regardless of need)
no thanks.
-----Added 16/10/2008 at 11 : 21 : 31-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Some would say nothing. Others would say whatever we reasonably can. I'm inclined to say the latter. This is because I'm concerned with social cohesion. I want the society I live in to thrive. I don't want economic disparity to tear it apart at the seams.
And I'm willing to pay for it.
|
this is the exact mindset i used to subscribe to. For these exact reasons. I used to think "we're all in this together! I don't have a problem
paying my dues"
But then i realized it's a fallacy.
We're not living in a tiny village. We are not working towards a greater collective good.
What a wonderful and utopian view the Global Village mentality is, but it just doesn't work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
What's been greatly missing out of the conversation is the moral side of things, which smooth has just pointed out. It's tough to relate the two because it's pointless to try to determine the motives of government policy. What we should measure, however, is the moral imperative of the society at large. Do people want to fight poverty? Do people want the sick out in the streets? Do we want people to have to work their fingers to the bone and still not have enough to live comfortably? Do we want access to education left only to the wealthy?
|
some people want to fight poverty. Others feel guilty and then buy a Humvee. That's their right (unfortunately). Some people are embedded in foreign countries working hard at applying approriate technologies to supplant struggling economies and regenerate degraded ecosystems to encourage economic growth and protection from weather related disasters. That's their right.
Some people
do work their asses off and get nothing. Other people don't work a day in their life and get by rather comfortably with government subsidies. Apparently they are the same in the eyes of the government? They are both allowed a chunk of someone else's money? (Including taking money from the overworked/underpaid). That's not very fair. Reward those who work. Priveleges need to be earned, not subsidized.
I never said anything about privitization of education.