"Small government" How exactly would you accomplish it?

[Kujako]

Yes. The government creates a poverty that shouldn't be there when it manipulates the economy. They increase the prices of hiring employees and stops low costs products/services by creating regulation laws. Then you have people without access to jobs and low cost education, then you need the government to "create jobs" and provide "free education" for them, when what actually happens, according to the libertarian theory, is that the government made them poor in the first place.

You can read guys like Friedman and Hayek for more info. Hope it helps.

Ah yes, the old "if you just give rich people more money, they'll create jobs that the market doesn't demand. Out of the goodness of their heart!" theory. Has that ever worked?

[Raeph]

sure, "stop being poor, it's just lazy".

Not quite:

1. Get a Job, any job, and stick with it.
2. Improve your social network and social contacts.
3. See what growth opportunities there are in your sphere of influence. (What openings are there for a new business? What jobs need to be filled where there are special requirements that I can meet? What kind of certification(s) are employers in your sphere of influence looking for?)
3. Use that social network and contacts to gain education opportunities.(on the job training, vocational studies, college with tuition reimbursement plans, grants or scholarships)
4. Take that education and seek out new job opportunities.
5. Settle yourself in the new position. If you are now making the money to support your desired lifestyle then continue at your new position. If not restart at step 1.

Example: I used to work in a office job. It was a customer service call center. One of the people I worked with was a woman in her upper 40s, had to take a second job to help her daughter out, along with some of her other financial issues. After that location closed down (recession related company reorganization), she tried a few jobs then move to another town about 70 miles away and got a CDL license. She now works between 60-70 hours a week but makes between 2-3 times what she did at the former job with the second job combined.

[Hraklea]

Ah yes, the old "if you just give rich people more money, they'll create jobs that the market doesn't demand. Out of the goodness of their heart!" theory.

That's not what I said. Actually, a common libertarian argument is that what happens in a system where the government takes money from the rich to give to the poor is that the rich and government join together to screw the poor (Brazil is a great example of that) because the government has the power to manipulate the economy. I think that removing the power from the government solves that problem. Anyway...

The thing is that increasing the regulations and costs for business prevent poor people to start their own business, and they need to work for another person (who is richer) rather than start their own company. That reduces competition, which eventually leads to monopoly, and increases poverty (because the rich has excessive power over the poor) and prices (making poor people even more poor).

Has that ever worked?

The most famous case of a successful country with a high level of liberty is Hong Kong, but there are other examples, like Singapura and New Zeland.

[Kujako]

That's not what I said.

Fair enough, but it does seem like what you intended. But I could be wrong.

The most famous case of a successful country with a high level of liberty is Hong Kong, but there are other examples, like Singapura and New Zeland.

Hong Kong is not a country, it was part of England for a long while and is now part of China. China has one of the best/worse examples of government being involved in commerce. Most large companies are at least partially state owned.

[Hraklea]

Hong Kong is not a country, it was part of England for a long while and is now part of China.

Fair enough, but Hong Kong stills the most free "bunch of land" in the world. It doesn't have as much government interference as China.

[Kujako]

Fair enough, but Hong Kong stills the most free "bunch of land" in the world. It doesn't have as much government interference as China.

... it is China. That's like saying that Texas has less government interference then America.

[Kalcheus]

... it is China. That's like saying that Texas has less government interference then America.

When Hong Kong returned to Chinese control, there were some agreements regarding relative independence, etc.

[Hraklea]

That's like saying that Texas has less government interference then America.

Texas has a different level of interference than the American's average interference because different states have different rules set by the state government. Just like a mayor can make a law for his city, and it won't be valid in another city, even if they are both in the same country.

Hong Kong is the same case. It has its own government, and has its particular rules compared to the rest of China.

[cmennare]

There many ways to reduce the size of our government, congress knows this but will not implement it because of the immediate economic damage that it will do. Bring all American troops home from overseas. 50,000 combat troops in Japan alone that we pay for, let the Japanese provide and pay for their own defense. The same goes for Europe and the Middle-East. Stop ordering equipment that our commanders do not want. Stop spending billions on the F35 joint fighter, it is a failure, go back to the F14,15,16's, we still cannot be beaten with these planes. Reopen the bases here at home that have been closed and house our troops there. The surrounding areas will appreciate the extra business. Trim the State department back, stop sending aid to foreign countries period. Use that money here at home. The EPA can be dissolved because each individual state has a DNR of some type that manages the natural resources of that state, they are better informed about what is going on in there own state than DC will ever be. The profit needs to be taken out of our prison industry, put the government back in charge of all prisons and then remove non-violent offenders. They are not a physical danger to the public. Legalize recreational drugs, treat them the same as alcohol. We are adults, we are able to decide what we put in our bodies. Institute a Flat tax or a National Sales tax and eliminate the progressive tax. No loop holes for individuals or Corporations. Stop bailing out banks and manufacturers, if their venture fails then let them go through the bankruptcy process as outlined in the Constitution. Remove ourselves from these trade agreements that only benefit our trading partners. We play by the rules of the agreement but our partners like China break them at every possible chance. A tariff on all imports coming into the country add a surcharge if it was from a manufacturer that used to build here in America and then shipped overseas for cheap labor and lax safety laws. Protectionism? you bet, but it sure beats bending over and being screwed by a bunch of third world countries exploiting their women, children, and prisoners. Use the repatriated troops to secure our borders and remove people in the country illegally. We have an immigration policy, use it. Allow our Corporations to repatriate their off-shore profits at a reasonable tax rate instead of the 25% charge they get now. This would allow these companies to restore manufacturing jobs here to America. And if we are working then tax revenue will begin to increase. DOT was started to take care of our Interstate highway system under President Eisenhower. This was done after he experienced the efficiency the Germans had with the Autobahn, merge DOT into the Army Corp of Engineers, eliminate a ton of red tape and streamline the bidding and ordering process. Remove the financial shenanigans from Washington, DC. Term limits for both houses of Congress, campaigns allowed to start 6 weeks before an election. Campaigns funded by tax payers through Tariffs collected from imports. No more Political Action Committees(PACS), these are a joke at the moment and are a perfect example of a well intentioned idea being corrupted. Remove the ability of judges to legislate from the bench. The Constitution limits Congress to passing bills and financing these bills. The Supreme Court is only there to determine if the law is constitutionally legal. No court can order a law be changed or financed, all they can do is rule on the merits of the case according to the law, the case can be appealed all the way to the supreme court and they determine if the law is good as it is or not, if not then Congress is the one that needs to change the law and have the President sign off on it.
Many people complain about a government that is too large when what they should complain about is that it is too intrusive into our lives. The Federal Government spends way too much time and money sticking its nose into the business of States and individuals. The 10th Amendment to the Constitution says that any powers not specifically given to the Federal Government shall be retained by the States or the People. The NSA has no business spying on its own citizens, as a matter of fact it should be disbanded all together. We have the FBI as law enforcement for the Federal Government and we have the CIA that protects us outside of our borders. There are way too many alphabet soup companies running around the country right now and they are more concerned with their agency getting credit for saving the country from bad guys so they can get a bigger appropriations budget for next year, that vital information gets lost or overlooked. That is how we ended up with 9/11. We can eliminate all of the agencies and just have the FBI and CIA, of course some of the manpower and financing would be merged with these 2 agencies, but the over all effect would be a huge net savings and we would be safer.
Well I think I have rambled enough for now, but you can get the idea. There are a myriad of ideas and ways to trim our government down to something more manageable and more effective in general.

[Asera]

The government should make a point of just staying out of social issues as much as possible.


Edit: The post below mine is basically correct. We should shrink the government, but we can't go to some magical tiny government. As a society grows, the governing body must also increase in size, power, and organization.

So,

By implying that a larger population results in a more uncontrolled, irrational society, we must patch it by appointing members of this implied incompetent society to a position of power over the other implied incompetent members of society...?

Wow, what flawless logic!

In similar discussions with people who advocate "small government" I have noticed that "non-essential government" invariably equals "everything that doesn't serve my interest" in their minds.

This can be applied to anyone that supports taxation to provide services run by state monopoly. "Free healthcare" is in their interests, people who don't support this are "against their interest".

AKA: Double standard.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't help but think of the vapid Miss America-esque "world peace" response whenever I hear someone talking about "small government." Both only seem to exist in some utopian ideal.

I'm sure there are things we can cut back on, and there are plenty of people taking advantage of the system, but in a country of 300+ million people, a "small government" just sounds delusional.

A utopian society is on the complete opposite end of the spectrum to a free society.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I'm going to have to reiterate this point, I guess.
"Small government" isn't quite what you think it means.
It doesn't mean "little government at all levels". It means "small government at the highest levels, more government at the lower levels."
Why that's considered preferable: accountability, and the ability to respond to the local voters concerns. The biggest problem with big government at the federal level is that the popular interest is typically discounted compared to corporate/lobbyist interest.
So saying "poor people won't be helped if the government is small" isn't necessarily correct. State and county government could enact their own programs.

What state rights have been taken away that you would like to see returned? Like what can't states currently regulate by their own decision that the Fed has taken control of?

[Pitkanen]

Not quite:

1. Get a Job, any job, and stick with it.
2. Improve your social network and social contacts.
3. See what growth opportunities there are in your sphere of influence. (What openings are there for a new business? What jobs need to be filled where there are special requirements that I can meet? What kind of certification(s) are employers in your sphere of influence looking for?)
3. Use that social network and contacts to gain education opportunities.(on the job training, vocational studies, college with tuition reimbursement plans, grants or scholarships)
4. Take that education and seek out new job opportunities.
5. Settle yourself in the new position. If you are now making the money to support your desired lifestyle then continue at your new position. If not restart at step 1.

Basically, be more competitive than your neighbor so you get the job instead of your neighbor. If you neighbor dies in the street from hypothermia after being foreclosed on then it's his fault it wasn't you instead.
The number of jobs that pay enough that you wouldn't need SS/MC, doesn't exceed or even come close to the number of people in the workforce.

[Prokne]

So I have yet to actually have a dialogue with someone touting the merits of small government that could actually explain to me which government organizations/bureaus and regulations were unnecessary.

Most people Ive heard proposing an extremely small government say that they are pretty much all unnecessary except for the military and probably the judicial branch. They think that everything the government does can be done by private companies. Now what they cant tell you is how private companies are going to do what the government does or even that they are more trustworthy or efficient than government.

[Asera]

Ah yes, the old "if you just give rich people more money, they'll create jobs that the market doesn't demand. Out of the goodness of their heart!" theory. Has that ever worked?

No, as exampled by the current state of corporatism in the United States and around the world.

Your statement doesn't coincide with the idea that it's not really possible for government to manipulate the economy to change the laws of supply and demand or determine an appropriate response to scarcity. If anything, it enforces it. Hence "giving rich people more money". Stating the problem as a reason the problem exists to undermine the point of the statement outlining why the problem exists doesn't make sense, and makes your comment essentially, rubbish.

[Kalcheus]

What state rights have been taken away that you would like to see returned? Like what can't states currently regulate by their own decision that the Fed has taken control of?

Mostly they've taken away dollars. An example, though, would be education. It's hard to fix schools at the local level when they're dependent upon meeting federal standards to receive funding.

[Varabently]

I think something like the Fair Tax is a good start.

[Asera]

Most people Ive heard proposing an extremely small government say that they are pretty much all unnecessary except for the military and probably the judicial branch. They think that everything the government does can be done by private companies. Now what they cant tell you is how private companies are going to do what the government does or even that they are more trustworthy or efficient than government.

Whether or not private company x is more trustworthy is irrelevant. The point is freedom of choice. A state run monopoly on a service does not give you this.

[Masark]

Mostly they've taken away dollars. An example, though, would be education. It's hard to fix schools at the local level when they're dependent upon meeting federal standards to receive funding.

Well then why don't they just stand up on their hind feet and raise their own funding?

[Hraklea]

The number of jobs that pay enough that you wouldn't need SS/MC, doesn't exceed or even come close to the number of people in the workforce.

The problem is that, according to the libertarian economical theories, atempting to solve this problem only makes it worse. As I said before, you have to do what works, not what "looks moral and noble on the paper".

[Kalcheus]

Well then why don't they just stand up on their hind feet and raise their own funding?

Because people in many of these districts with poor schools couldn't afford to pay more taxes? And it doesn't change the fact that the federal government still has their mandates in place.