Thread: Someone explain this to me.

The problem for me is that the Government should not need anything outside of what is required to protect and serve the people. There should be no committees, research centers, etc. That should all be private and privately funded.

It's the same concept regardless of who is doing it and I wouldn't volunteer for it either way, but I just have strong feelings about in what the government should be involved (and what it shouldn't).

Originally Posted by ats200

The problem for me is that the Government should not need anything outside of what is required to protect and serve the people. There should be no committees, research centers, etc. That should all be private and privately funded.

It's the same concept regardless of who is doing it and I wouldn't volunteer for it either way, but I just have strong feelings about in what the government should be involved (and what it shouldn't).

The problem is there are many areas of research the private sector will not fund for one reason or another and some types of research that are too expensive so the Govt steps in here. If the Govt didn't get involved there are many medical devices and procedures that simply would not exist.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

...too expensive so the Govt steps in...

And yet I wonder why the Govt is speeding headlong toward financial insolvency

Ahhh the old addage comes to mind...

"Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Come on gents seriously, some of us are old enough to remember when Insurance itself was voluntary, so were seat belts, infant seats, smoking in a car even, it was the insurance companies and their lobbyists that changed all that.. If you seriously think these devices will continue to be "voluntary" yer smoking the wrong pipe

Originally Posted by gssixgun

yer smoking the wrong pipe

And now we have a proof that 'wrong' is relative

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Ahhh the old addage comes to mind...

"Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Come on gents seriously, some of us are old enough to remember when Insurance itself was voluntary, so were seat belts, infant seats, smoking in a car even, it was the insurance companies and their lobbyists that changed all that.. If you seriously think these devices will continue to be "voluntary" yer smoking the wrong pipe

Remember sitting on your father's lap and driving the car yourself? Do that with your kid's and see what happens when Officer Friendly pulls you over. Reminds me of the quote from Franklin, :Anybody who would give up their essential liberty for security deserves neither." And this is what has happened and is still happening now.

Last time I looked there was no pill you took in the morning before you went to class to make you attentive and want to learn. If H.S was a waste take some responsibility. If you wanted to do well in school what held you back? Were the staff really that horrible?

Private schools can cherry pick students and have the ability to lavish time and money which public schools don't.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

The problem is there are many areas of research the private sector will not fund for one reason or another and some types of research that are too expensive so the Govt steps in here. If the Govt didn't get involved there are many medical devices and procedures that simply would not exist.

I truly believe it would still exist but there's really no way to validly argue either side of this. If the private sector isn't funding something important, it's because the government is. If there were no government run education system, would there be no schools? Yes, there would be, and I would almost guarantee they'd be far superior. I believe this same concept would translate into any sector.

If there's no private demand for an industry, it shouldn't exist.

I find all that government vs. private business bashing ridiculous.

The free market is great at doing profitable stuff efficiently, the government is for doing stuff that need to be done even if they are unprofitable, just because that's part of having a functioning society. Not everything in this world is based on making profit.

Do you think if the government wouldn't be providing things like laws, judicial system, or law enforcement those won't exist? They will come from private entities and would be far superior for those who can afford them and suck really badly for those who can't.

I think you're confused on what exactly is meant by government vs. private business.

Government does have a use and a reason, they are what you described. Laws, enforcement, judicial, legislative, etc. All of these duties are clearly outlined in documents made long ago.

Capitalism comes into play with everything else. Reverting back to education which I think is a good example, of course some private sector schools would be better than others and some would be astronomically priced. But there would also be a market for good, average schools. Does everyone deserve an education? Yes. Is it currently being provided to them? No.

I'm not far out of high school, about 5 years, but I know for a fact that they hand out diplomas like candy on Halloween. I have to admit that many of my friends, and myself included, did not deserve to graduate. The system is a joke and needs to be fixed. If you don't put in the time and work, you fail and you dig ditches. If you're committed and intelligent, you go on to something else. It's not reasonable to tell every kid that they can be an astronaut or lawyer - it just wont happen.

(that turned into more of an argument about our schools, but this was the result of the public, government run, system)