Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

darbikrash wrote:ao

  • Wed, Oct 12, 2011 - 10:57am

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1612

    count placeholder

    darbikrash wrote:ao



I don’t know of any Tea Party supporters who say we don’t need any government.  But I agree they do argue for a smaller government.  Are you saying you don’t support a smaller government?


Given the current state of corporate malfeasance, or if you prefer, corruption, I don’t believe quantitative judgment can be passed as to the size of government. I would prefer the smallest government possible, of course, but on the grounds of striving for efficiency.

I believe the Tea Party commits a significant error in reflexively calling for smaller government, without appropriate predecessor activities, such as removing the influence of corporate money from the political process. This has the effect of removing whatever modicum of regulation still remains in our corrupt system, and turning the reins over to the free market- a cure that is surely worse than the disease.

Another remark is that I do not see any allowance for government scaling with population growth, nor with complexity of society. Distasteful as it may be, there is a necessary proportionality to the size of the government and the complexity of the society in question. I cannot honestly say I have ever heard any Tea Partiers (certainly not any Libertarians) acknowledge this requirement, a requirement seen by virtually all businesses in the private sector. To me, this indicates irresponsibility. Now, I do understand the frustration, and it is entirely justified, but this  response seems a sure indicator of rash, “shoot first ask questions later” philosophy.


What does the state of corruption have to do with the size of government and "?quantitative judgement?"?

Also, you’re introducing a straw man argument with regards to "predecessor activities".  We were discussing size of government, not corporate money influence upon the political process.  Also, what makes you think Tea Party members aren’t opposed to or haven’t spoken out against   undue corporate influence?  You and many others here consistently misstate and misrepresent the Tea Party.

There has been plenty of scaling for population growth and societal complexity.  Our population has increased 3 1/2 fold in the last century while our government has increased 300 fold.  Whatever happened to economies of scale?  Economies of scale don’t work against increased size of an entity, they work for it.  You have the situation backwards.