Originally posted by: Stunt
Perhaps it would force people to be more informed on the decisions they make on a day to day basis. Most are hesitant to support the small government way of life because they've come to rely on government for everything.Originally posted by: Rainsford
...
And your argument is equally silly because you're substituting one extreme for the other. Consumers COULD be very well educated about all the products a company makes and band together to make the appropriate demands, but here's the thing...quite often they don't. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. You're right that transfats have been removed from many foods because many consumers are educated on this topic. But while consumers COULD have demanded lead free gasoline, they didn't, mostly because the average consumer did NOT have the information necessary to make that decision.
What's stupid here isn't liberal or conservative views, it's the one size fits all mentality that gives rise to extremists on both sides who think the answer to every question of government intervention or not must be answered the same way. "Big government" and "small government" are both ridiculous ideologies because not every situation is the same, and treating them as if they were seems a lot like the guy with just a hammer seeing every problem as something that can be solved by hammering.
Where's the ideology that says we should look at every individual issue and decide if the government can provide a good solution or if it's best left alone? Call me crazy, but that seems like a way better idea if you ask me.
Government is involved in so many things around the world it's ridiculous; in quebec all electricity is owned and sold by government, in ontario all liquor and beer is owned and sold by government, in BC all insurance is owned and sold by the government. When people are born, they accept past traditions without clearly understanding or debating the reasons for these institutions. If you ask most Canadians, they will tell you that healthcare is something the state should administer and nobody else because that's what we've been born into. Nobody challenges it or makes significant efforts to reform it because that would be politically unpopular. This mindset prevents improvement and fails all people who are forced to use the system. Where does one draw the line with an institution that can be infinite in size! Techs has in effect advocated no limit in government's size, jurisdiction and intervention; a horrible situation to say the least!
The three essentials for life are food, clothing and shelter...all are minimally regulated industries (relative to healthcare/security) and all do quite well in servicing their respective consumers. I don't advocate the elimination of government, I do see some value in regulation (rules and enforcement), but government is many times larger than its own good. A regulatory body should consume no more than 5% of an economy...the animal we have represents 50-60% of our productivity...it's astonishing.
What you're saying is pretty much what I was talking about with regard to taking things too far the other way. You don't like state owned liquor stores being the only place to buy beer, so your solution is to eliminate 90% of the government. You take the position that government is a bad thing in general and should be reduced in size as much as possible, then demonstrate your point by picking the most ridiculous examples of government excess you can find. A prime example of blowing up your house to get rid of termites if I've ever seen it.
Which is basically my point...trying to cram everything into the large generality of "small government" or "big government" is a bit goofy. Why should my views on state owned liquor stores be in any way related to my views on the government trying to keep planes from colliding while circling around Chicago? I think the only rational way to look at it is to take each individual issue one at a time and figure out if the government can help.
Of course I think that's where we differ...I don't view the government as this monster to be eliminated or controlled, it's simply another group and another resource that can be used to provide solutions to problems. Sometimes it might not be the best solution, but sometimes it is, and it seems silly to ignore those times because doctrine says that government is always bad.