Your thoughts of Government

Started by Tazero, February 16, 2009, 08:09:22 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

tSwitch

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 23, 2009, 08:25:54 pm
You'd be suprised


MK, you're 13.
You don't know anything about the government (as I can see from this thread), and you have no idea what anarchy really means.  Please wait 3 or so years before posting another one of these topics.


FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

Tazero

NEVER!
I know plenty but don't feel like being serious


If you were a fish...

Blizzard

Check out Daygames and our games:

King of Booze 2      King of Booze: Never Ever
Drinking Game for Android      Never have I ever for Android
Drinking Game for iOS      Never have I ever for iOS


Quote from: winkioI do not speak to bricks, either as individuals or in wall form.

Quote from: Barney StinsonWhen I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.

tSwitch

February 24, 2009, 05:21:22 pm #23 Last Edit: February 24, 2009, 06:02:52 pm by NAMKCOR
Quote from: MetaKnight on February 24, 2009, 04:39:54 pm
NEVER!
I know plenty but don't feel like being serious


I wonder why I don't believe you.

Quote from: Blizzard on February 24, 2009, 04:42:46 pm
Then GTFO of this thread.


edit: deleted the reply, which was ".......", please do not spam


FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

fugibo

Dude. A knife isn't gonna save you from one doped up gangstah, let alone Eminem's Gustapo.

Starrodkirby86

How about we get off the knife and mob thing and go into the real subject about government...?

Like...do you think America's Government is corrupt or something? I'm not a big debater on Politics, so I'm minding my business here.

What's osu!? It's a rhythm game. Thought I should have a signature with a working rank. ;P It's now clickable!
Still Aqua's biggest fan (Or am I?).




Tazero

Why government sucks:
Economy , Stimulus is gonna screw us over in the long run,
Poverty millions suffering for it,
Secrecy , why keep it?


If you were a fish...

wolfi--

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 02:13:03 am
Why government sucks:
Economy , Stimulus is gonna screw us over in the long run,
Poverty millions suffering for it,
Secrecy , why keep it?


Didn't actually get 1, but
2. You think if there was no Government, there would be no poverty? Or if there was free rule, everyone would be rich? True, true. Everyone could rob any bank with a gun. Anyone could get a gun.
3. They keep secrecy because if the public learn about the Govt's secret or defense plans or something, they will give it off to other countries for money (cuz everyone likes money). Therefore, war.

Tazero

Not that secrecy when the 'suits' at the top are covering something completely inevitable teell us so at the least we can be prepared mental breakdowns aren't priority #1

no im not saying that though about the poverty
Poverty will be there governnt no government but they neglect alot of the 50 states


If you were a fish...

tSwitch

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 02:13:03 am
Why government sucks:
Economy , Stimulus is gonna screw us over in the long run,


proof, show me it.
You've made a statement, now support it.

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 02:13:03 am
Poverty millions suffering for it,


This is a vague statement.  Millions in every country are poor, how does that make the American government different.

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 02:13:03 am
Secrecy , why keep it?


I can't believe you don't see the point for secrecy in a government.

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 03:17:45 am
Poverty will be there governnt no government but they neglect alot of the 50 states


I'm sorry what?
show me some evidence.

It sounds to me like you halfway paid attention to the debates over the last election, and got the subjects but not the arguments or the facts.  I suppose you think Obama is a socialist muslim too?

I maintain that you have no idea what you're talking about.



FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

Diokatsu

Quote from: MetaKnight on February 25, 2009, 02:13:03 am
Why government sucks:
Economy , Stimulus is gonna screw us over in the long run,
Poverty millions suffering for it,
Secrecy , why keep it?


I think you're being a bit too harsh, Namkcor, though I do agree that he cannot support any of his statements. Just don't bait him. I'll explain my opinion on some of these.

Economy: I do agree, the stimulus will cause a massive amount of damage to the economy. The government should get involved in some ways, like worker protection and rights.However, this isn't how it should work, even if they want the companies to stay around. The first job is to weed out corruption. I'll face this, too: companies are corrupt. It's bound to happen and it's easy to see how much was let slip by. We must prevent further corruption and waste by eliminating the source of it first. Then this stimulus plan seems a plausible solution. But, by letting the same people run the companies that drove it into the ground, we're asking for disaster.

America has a damn high standard of living and poverty in America is nothing like other countries. Get over yourself.

The government needs secrecy to operate. They have things that must be kept secret FOR YOUR PROTECTION.

Punn

From what I heard from my Economic/Gov't teacher, he stated that its not the governments fault, but its their fault for not regulating the economy itself. Someone from the Senate or whatever, said that the economy is fine by itself, so they left it out there in the cold where its now startin to kill itself.
I DO agree that the Stimulus won't really help much, because its the taxpayers (Like me) who is suffering and now I'm helpin pickin up the mess that the banks caused.
Although, the bank president (I forgot which, I think its Chase?) was hiding and spendin on crap by himself, and actually becomin selfish and corrupt, so this slowly (not seriously) contributed to the mess...

I think I'll hit him up on AIM and see what's his opinion...

winkio

Agreed Punn.  Your Civics teacher is spot on, in my opinion.

I think the past few months have been interesting.  It was as if all of a sudden, on a particular day in January, we all suddenly decided to start holding the government accountable for every single problem in the world, and demanded that they be fixed immediately.  This was in stark contrast to before that date where nobody held the government accountable for anything.  Look at the roots of the problems, they go way back to small actions that started them, and they have only been growing ever since.  There is no way to fix problems that have been going on for years with a wave of a magic wand.

What's more, I don't think people fully understand government.  People hate paying taxes, and many avoid doing it.  Yet it is these taxes finance their roads, schools, public facilities, and safety, among others.  Yet these ungrateful jerks withhold their share of the burden.  It's like freeloading off of society.  Also, people think that Congress does nothing, and that the president has all the power.  WRONG.  That is a dictatorship.

Diokatsu

Whether or not the government helps the economy is a decision that is based on your on view of what the economy needs. I suppose the "quick-fix method" would be to have our money fix it immediately. However, if you look at the alternative, it would gradually restore itself anyways. No economy in today's society can plausibly go completely tanked. In fact, even if all these businesses failed, there would be another business with the right practices to take over. Some skeptics do say that this a stretch, but if you think about how our economy is arranged, it's only a matter of time before it "fixes" itself. Our economy will not be the same as it was at it's peak for a long time, a very long time. This is the case in both ways of solving this problem. But, I think each way has it's own benefits. When the government doesn't help the economy, the economy will renew itself. The corruption will be gone, for the time, and new minds will enter. Innovation will be key in the new market as businesses rush to out do each other. This is a way to stimulate the economy as well. Soon, bigger and more powerful businesses will rise up and America will see itself in a refreshed state. The downside is quite obvious and painful though. Suffering under a horrific economy will see an increase in crime and poverty. Luxuries will go through the roof and anything worth anything will be owned by the aristocracy that would soon be arising. Maybe another Gilded Age, even. The government helping the economy will see the most immediate benefits. The economy will be "restored" and business will flourish. We will have a stable economy sooner than ever. Only problem is, the American people will pay for it out of their own pockets, and, unlike public works, the benefits will largely not affect them in their daily lives. And, this keeps the old business practices the same, which encourages such things as "developing your brand". I mean, either way, we have a possible negative side-effect. It's all how you look at the government as well. Don't think that, because I'd rather not have government involvement in the economy, I'd just as soon see it go away. I appreciate what the government does with it's power, especially when geared towards equal rights and social justice. Taxes are an essential part of the government, to fund projects that benefit myself and others in their daily lives. i have no problem with government regulations in some areas, like worker's rights. This isn't a matter of government power in general, just over the economy at this point.

fugibo

Why are we arguing about Communism v Socialism v Feudalism v Fascism v Tribalism in this thread? The Government sucks at economy because it regulates like idiots when it does regulate, not because it doesn't regulate. Some would argue that laissez-faire is the better policy, and some would definitely argue against that. However, I think it may be better in America's case because of our longstanding opinion not to intervene and to keep the Gov. separate (from state, from the individual, etc.), but that's just my opinion. But when they actually go for regulation, they usually screw it up epically, which is why they suck.

That, and Congress is so influenced by the (corrupt) media that it isn't even funny.

tSwitch

as far as the stimulus goes:
The economy can't exist without money, right?
The idea behind it is if they give tax breaks to companies, the companies can then afford to pay wages, and won't have to cut jobs, meaning people will have money to spend, which goes back into the economy.

Dio, your idea sounds good on paper, like all ideas, however it's very radical and it's a shot in the dark if anything else.  I'd rather not have to experience the economy tanking just to see it get better, when there are possibilities of other solutions.


FCF3a A+ C- D H- M P+ R T W- Z- Sf RLCT a cmn+++ d++ e++ f h+++ iw+++ j+ p sf+
Follow my project: MBlok | Find me on: tSwitch.us | Twitter | Tumblr

Diokatsu

Yeah, the idea does sound "good",but it's really just an ideal. However, I just can't see the stimulus being effective as it hopes to be. I suppose no plan is perfect.

Tazero

How will stimulus help? yes the money but look at us we need money but if we get it we'll be in debt with china,japan act. wherever we get the debt payed off we'll be in a communist country.... Your right i don't have facts to prove it but look at the title
THOUGHTS


If you were a fish...

winkio

Meta, you have no idea what you are talking about.  Debt is a common feature of governments.  The thing is, you can't pay it off unless you have money.  And that is one thing that we sure as hell don't have right now.  Now, moving on to stimulus:

This is how it works:  The government gives money to failing businesses, which, in turn, stop laying people off, saving jobs and possibly creating more, which gives more to the consumers to drive the economy.  That is oversimplified, but if you want to learn more, you should really look it up.  I suggest you do if you want to be taken seriously here.

fugibo

The problem is that the businesses are corrupt :(

I think that we should add a limit to how high the the sales cost to production cost ratio can get to a much lower level, that way midclass consumers will have more money to spend. That could compensate for the loss on markups, keep everything much the same except for the fact that more wealth is flowing into the middle class and less into the void that is the upper class.

Please show me the hole in my logic :)