*belief On Nov 12, 1:23 pm, Mike Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote: > I echo Billy's thoughts. > > Which people believe that a nanny government is taking care of them > and cast off their own personal responsibility, who would otherwise be > exemplars of responsibility under a libertarian system? Some people > are just brought up to be stupid and lazy, and would continue to be > stupid and lazy otherwise. Rather than gut the system, wouldn't it be > more beneficial to radically reform our education system and train > students to become responsible adults? For someone who has quite > little believe in the ability of government to do anything > effectively, you're certainly putting a lot of stock in banking on a > sea change in government to change people's personalities. > > On Nov 12, 9:14 am, "Kevin Kervick" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Billy: > > > I said government "intervention" causes the malady. It strikes me that one > > way opponents of libertarianism discredit it is to use the straw man > > argument that libertarians are anti-government. Libertarians believe in > > limited government, the more local and decentralized the better. > > > Let's take out of wedlock births for starters. Government welfare policy, > > and some would argue, drug enforcement policy, have directly impacted the > > marriage rate. Paying people more if they are not married has lessened the > > value of marriage. Paying single people to have children has increased the > > numbers of single people having children. Europe is way ahead of the US. > > > The nanny government creates a condition where-by people come to believe > > someone is there to take care of them, which impacts personal > > responsibility and neighborliness. I trust spontaneous order more than the > > controlling tendencies of power-seeking men. > > > Kevin > > > Kevin : > > Government causes "the" malady ? > > > I don't follow, although I suspect it is because we are thinking about > > different classes of things. Otherwise this is a mystery. > > > Government causes abortions ? > > " " homosexuality ? > > " " Hollywood movies and the nihilistic values > > they promote ? > > " " out of wedlock births ? > > " " drug abuse ? > > > Maybe gvt has some role in various such matters, but it seems much more > > likely that market forces, so to speak, are the greater culprits. > > > Anyway, why reflexively hit on government ? > > Why reflexively give a free pass to the market ? > > > We do have a Constitution that many people regard as inspired and a Great > > Good. > > Why not defend the Constitution and the government it created ? > > Government is not the enemy. The idiots who are now IN government, > > certainly a lot of them, are the enemy. Personally I'd like to lynch > > about half > > of everyone now in Washington DC. But this is very different than > > blaming government, especially our Constitutional government. > > > Libertarians cannot have it both ways, pro-Constitution and > > anti-government. > > The Constitution created our government. It legitimates our government. > > The Constitution is meaningless without our government. > > We need better government, hence my main reason for > > recommending all those new Amendments. But I sure in heck > > don't want to see our government gutted. > > > Which Amendments do you think would not improve government ? > > > Exactly what is the value in ceaseless attacks on government ? > > How does that make good sense ? Why not spend time and energy > > trying to improve government ? > > > And what is the alternative ? No government ? That would be irrational. > > And, if successful, it would be suicidal. > > > Billy > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > 11/11/2011 3:53:36 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: > > Hello Billy: > > > I would take it a step further. I believe government intervention > > causes the malady. Thus if we want to improve society we should eliminate > > the cause. > > > Kevin > > > Mike : > > You certainly "get" the idea of Radical Centrism. I don't think > > anyone here > > could have said it better. Not at all clear, however, what the > > relevance is > > to social conservatives and values issues. Kevin also made the point > > that > > these kinds of issues matter to many, many people. > > > How the government treats the less well off ( or the poor as such ) > > is mostly, > > at least as I see it, more a question of economics and incentives. Is > > there > > anyone who regards it as moral to injure the well being of Americans > > who live at poverty levels ? Seems to me that, about this, there is > > no > > moral issue at all, just a means/ends issue, how to get the best > > result > > in terms of $$ for both gvt and individuals. > > > Generally, if not overwhelmingly, "values" refers to a very different > > set of issues, call them "hot button" if you prefer. They have this > > designation > > precisely because of emotional responses they arouse. > > > Billy > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > 11/10/2011 2:10:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > [email protected] writes: > > This all goes back to "arete" with me. Whether the government or > > private charity goes toward keeping the destitute alive, the > > homeless > > situation leaves the same economic drag either way. The false > > choice > > here is between the liberal idea of keeping a permanent underclass > > just barely alive, or the conservative idea of denying the > > legitimacy > > of the problem. Rather, I'd argue for a safety net that brings the > > destitute back to the starting line by medicating, providing the > > bare > > minimums, etc., but, in contrast with the current safety net, has an > > expectation of performance in return. > > > -- > > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > > <[email protected]> > > Google Group:http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > > Radical Centrism website and blog:http://RadicalCentrism.org > > > Radical Centrism website and blog:http://RadicalCentrism.org > > > -- > > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > > <[email protected]> > > Google Group:http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > > Radical Centrism website and blog:http://RadicalCentrism.org
-- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
