Role of Government, need input

[realist]

Some self-serving pressure groups are pushing a nationwide campaign for legislation unnecessarily regulating yet another industry with licensure. I am deep into this battle, and I am working on an article that would help to define the role of government in our lives to the lay people of the industry so that they will not be duped into believing that it is a great idea to expand the power of government unnecessarily.

I would like some statements from all of you concerning the role of government in our lives, from which and combined with my own writings I will compile an enlightening statement concerning keeping what liberty we do have.

All comments are welcome.

[aries]

What groups are pushing to license what thing?

I don't think the government serves a purpose other than to be a thorn in the sides of both free enterprise and personal liberty.

[Kat Kanning]

Role of government in our lives should be:  none.

[Follow]

Role of government summed up in a single sentence:

To protect the rights of the individual.

That could be the whole article.




Follow 

[realist]

Thanks for the comments so far. The problem is that these lobbyists are overemphasizing the fact that there is no regulation in this industry, which leads to an assumed danger towards the public, which it then in turn believes itself justified by protecting the rights of the alleged 'victims'.

The problem is that when confronted, these lobbyists can not produce one statistic supporting their claims of danger. The 'danger' is in fact so insignificant that there are no statistics to support regulating an industry that is doing no damage to anyone! But these wacko legislators just eat it up, "Oh my, a free, unregulated service industry! We have to do something about this!" They will initiate legislation WITH NO STATISTICS, NO RESEARCH, AND NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT! It is insane.

Meanwhile, the smart businessmen lobbyists walk all over this process setting themselves up in mandatory product status (national exam mandate) at $330 a pop to whoever can be qualified to practice said service.

This one really has me fired up.

[Follow]

Thanks for the comments so far. The problem is that these lobbyists are overemphasizing the fact that there is no regulation in this industry, which leads to an assumed danger towards the public, which it then in turn believes itself justified by protecting the rights of the alleged 'victims'.

The problem is that when confronted, these lobbyists can not produce one statistic supporting their claims of danger. The 'danger' is in fact so insignificant that there are no statistics to support regulating an industry that is doing no damage to anyone! But these wacko legislators just eat it up, "Oh my, a free, unregulated service industry! We have to do something about this!" They will initiate legislation WITH NO STATISTICS, NO RESEARCH, AND NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT! It is insane.

Meanwhile, the smart businessmen lobbyists walk all over this process setting themselves up in mandatory product status (national exam mandate) at $330 a pop to whoever can be qualified to practice said service.

This one really has me fired up.

Sounds like another day at the office for a legislator...  I had a similar battle that I lost here in Utah.  I wrote an article and sent a letter to all of my legislators regarding how I felt on the matter.  It was about smoking in private clubs, and here is a copy of it if you want to take a look.

Click and scroll down a bit

You can take a look at that if you like and write something similar, but the sad fact of the matter is that legislators don't care about facts or reason.  They care about two things.  Votes and money, and only because one leads to the other.  Rational argument is lost on these douchebags.  But if you can make enough of an impact on the douchebags voters that money can't buy back, then the douchebag comes around to see your point of view.

It's a wonderful little system, isn't it?  They're really not malicious, they're just self-interested.




Follow 

[realist]

I am having quite an impact actually. The CEO of the group that is leading this hellish campaign actually called me on my cell phone and tiraded for 25 minutes. Pretty pissed, he was! I have also seen several tactical changes directly related to pressure that I have administered.

I have a system of emailing, blogging, and forum jumping (industry specific) that is working tremendously well. I also have learned to find influential people who happen to side with me and kind of deploy them. I am this group's thorn in the flesh, but its still not enough. My industry alert blog site is taking off also. Its really all about mobilizing as many people as you can, and also mobilizing the right people.

Thanks for the letter. 

[aries]

Role of government summed up in a single sentence:

To protect the rights of the individual.

That could be the whole article.




Follow 

But can the government do that without denying them their rights?

[Dreepa]

What is the industry?

[Follow]

Role of government summed up in a single sentence:

To protect the rights of the individual.

That could be the whole article.




Follow 

But can the government do that without denying them their rights?

Assuming they had the consent of those involved, they could.  That's a complicated question in itself, but in my opinion progress requires a certain level of agreed security on the part of the people.  Not what we have today, but just enough like we had in days gone by to help promote efficiency without sacrificing liberty.

That's the short answer.  Maybe we should make another thread for a longer answer. 




Follow 

[FrankChodorov]

Role of government summed up in a single sentence:

To protect the rights of the individual.

That could be the whole article.




Follow 

But can the government do that without denying them their rights?

Assuming they had the consent of those involved, they could.  That's a complicated question in itself, but in my opinion progress requires a certain level of agreed security on the part of the people. 

Jefferson's answer was small-scale, face to face, deliberative democracy that are confederated with constitutionally guaranteed rights called ward republics where you did not delegated authority and had the right of secession...

[aries]

Role of government summed up in a single sentence:

To protect the rights of the individual.

That could be the whole article.




Follow 

But can the government do that without denying them their rights?

Assuming they had the consent of those involved, they could.  That's a complicated question in itself, but in my opinion progress requires a certain level of agreed security on the part of the people. 

Jefferson's answer was small-scale, face to face, deliberative democracy that are confederated with constitutionally guaranteed rights called ward republics where you did not delegated authority and had the right of secession...

I'm going to be majoring in Political Science for the next four years... the exploration of how politics work, and which system of it is the most effective.

Thus, it is very appropriate that I am personally a complete anarchist. Maybe like the chef that can't taste, I will do well 

[Lex]

The government can have as much or as little role as it wants as long as all the taking and giving that it does is only limited to people it contracts with. If you didn't sign a contract with the government offering to pay taxes than you shouldn't have to pay taxes. This way if government truly is the answer there should be enough people to volunteer to keep it alive and if not than nobody will sign up to pay for it. I think that's fair.

[FrankChodorov]

The government can have as much or as little role as it wants as long as all the taking and giving that it does is only limited to people it contracts with. If you didn't sign a contract with the government offering to pay taxes than you shouldn't have to pay taxes. This way if government truly is the answer there should be enough people to volunteer to keep it alive and if not than nobody will sign up to pay for it. I think that's fair.

what about the "free rider" problem?

[Lex]

what about the "free rider" problem?

What about it?