Anarchists advocate no government. Libertarians want a government, but very limited.
A nice rule of thumb way of remembering what libertarianism advocates is this: maximum individual freedom and minimum government intervention.
Some libertarians say that the government only has two basic roles to play in our lives. The first role of government is to enforce contractual agreements between people. If we sign a contract and one of us breaks the contract, then the government should step in and determine who is at fault and what compensation needs to be paid and by whom. The second role of government is to provide national defense -- the stress is on defensive capabilities, not offensive war-making capabilities in other countries. Outside of these two basic roles, people should be able to live their lives however they choose to live them and the government should stay out of their business.
What do you think? Should the government have more of a role in our lives? Or is the libertarian notion better -- that the government should only have two basic roles? If the government was limited to enforcing contracts and providing for national defense, how would that change peoples' daily lives? Would those changes be for the better or worse? Do you see any potential problems with giving people this much freedom?
I would love for the government to stay out of my business, but the fact is there are so many people out there who do the wrong thing, steal, murder, kidnap, all that bs, so if the gov was only to become involved in foreign offensive strikes for national security where would the civility go? We need laws locally that need to be enforced or I think structurally the states would fall apart, probably from some type of civil war, and good luck to the jackasses who don't support the right to bare arms.
ReplyDeletePsci
Chelse O'Connor
I agree with Chelse, the government would always say they are gonna make the United States a better place for us as citizens but in reality they are the reason for chaos. Due to the decision they have made with Obama about he right to bare arms is reflecting the second amendment. What happened to that freedom for protection? That's right it was all because of the trayvon vs zimmerman's case. They wonder why citizens are being chaotic and not care what the government has to say.
DeleteAshley Cole
PSCI 100:02
The government should be limited more, but I totally agree with what Chelse said. There would be plenty of civil unjust if the government only worked for those two roles. Having a strong national defense is great and all but there has to be laws for people to obey. People would take the freedom too far. It is not a good idea seeing as though there are already plenty of crazy people in today's society.
ReplyDeleteBlake Johnson
DeletePSCI 100:03
The government has enough roles playing in our lives. However, if the government was limited to just national defense and seeing if people uphold their contracts the country would be even worse. People would steal, kill and do many terrible things more frequently. Giving people this much freedom would be a huge potential of having potential problems with citizens lives and well being.
ReplyDeleteJ.C. Mao-Alston
PSCI 100:03
we would still have State and Local governments to regulate local affairs which would mean stealing and killing would be taken care off. What it is asking is whether a strong centralized government is better than locally ran governments.
DeleteThe government already plays too much of a role in our lives, and since thats the case, you're always going to see and hear people complaining about it. If you really think about it, there's no happy medium, because people complain now, and if the govenment played less of a role, people would complain about their lack of attention and awareness. In my opinion I would of course like it better if the government could stay out of people's business, but will that ever be the case? I would definitely have to say no. I agree with liberatarians about the government only playing two roles in our lives, but I don't know that I agree with what those two roles are. I'm not at all trying to say that these roles aren't important, but there are things such as crime rate which I see as a much bigger issue. I agree a lot with what liberatarians believe in, but I feel that if we took more of a liberatarian approach, then law enforcements would have to be tighter because we'd be giving people more freedom and that could lead to chaos. But there could always be restrictions.
ReplyDeleteKelsey Phelan
If the government only had those two roles, I can see so much harm coming out of it than there already is. We have enough criminals as is right now, people would take this freedom too far, like Blake already stated, and do far worse things more often and just create more problems and chaos.
ReplyDeleteAshleigh Orr
PSCI 100:03
I think that the government has so much control in our live today that it's hard to imagine the government being that limited. But I think that the government needs to have more than just the two functions because the government can be a key player in maintaining freedom. Today to shrink the government to that size would be detrimental to so many people because they depend on the government for social security, unemployment, disability, and welfare.
ReplyDeleteKayla Piechowiak
PSCI 100-03
I think the same as most of these people that have already responded before me. The government does already have their noses all up in our business enough. I somewhat agree with what the libertarians are saying, government shouldn't have so much say in our lives. but I think there are way more important things than contracts like someone said already, what about murders and other crimes? is that not important to them? I would rather see someone suffer the consequences of murder or rape than someone breaking a contract.
ReplyDeleteDanielle McManus
PSCI 100:02
The libertarian notion would be effective and sound in an ideal world. Unfortunately, people break laws. They kill, steal and rape. If the government limited itself to this libertarian notion, crime rates would go up. Poverty rates would go up. Until all people are economically sound and respectful to other people and their property at all times, we will need government to financially aid those in need and enforce laws.
ReplyDeleteMaggie Nevin
PSCI 100:03
I have very similar views to the previous statements made. Even though I believe that people can be organized without government intervention, except there are many who cannot control themselves. Therefore the government steps in; however, with each person who can conduct themselves with manners there are probably five who create complete chaos. I do see some good coming from the government when restraining the criminals, but I feel that individuals need to act correctly on their own. Sadly, we cannot become a complete anarchist country due to the lack of stability from a portion of the citizens.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Wilson
100:02
I think that it would be great for the government to stay out of peoples personal lives and let them go about their business. People should have the freedom to live their lives how they choose. I do agree though that the government should have a role in the defense of the country and defense only, but what worries me about this is that they could start abusing this power to start doing the same things they do today with the military. I think the people should have enough power over the government to stop this if it starts to occur. I also think the government would need to play a role in public safety, because people could get too happy with all the freedom they have and start to do hurtful things to other people, such as murder and rob. When I say that people should be able to live how they choose, that doesn't mean I think people should have the freedom to commit acts against humanity like that and take away other peoples natural freedoms and so I think the government should have the power to keep that in check, but also not be so powerful that it can be overruled if need be. I don't know if I agree with the government having a role in deciding who is at fault when a contract is broken. This could result in corruption and the government taking bribes to rule in favor of a certain party, just as they do now with the lobbyists.
ReplyDeleteMatt Deal
PSCI 100
The notion of libertarianism, like any system of government, sounds great on paper, but like anarchism I feel it is overly optimistic (but perhaps I'm wrong, since obviously I'm not an expert on human nature, and the level of built-in coercion in our society, as we discussed in class, could be such that we don't even realize how much our own mindset is affected by our upbringing within this system).
ReplyDeleteI do think that government should be more limited, as clearly abuses of power are one of the main problems in our government today. Perhaps it should be as limited as libertarianism would have, perhaps more, perhaps less, its hard to say.
I do think that the two roles of government given do seem like suitable places for the government to operate without abrogating individual freedom, but I would be inclined to say there are probably things not listed that, with more consideration, I would probably think the government should take care of.
One of the main 'obvious' issues with this form of limited government, as other people have pointed out, is that the lack of a policing structure would lead to more rapes, murders, etc, but I think just the opposite would take place, since, as Dr. Stump pointed out when I asked about a similar topic in class today, the people who don't choose to commit rapes or violent crimes are far from helpless in this system, and are in fact far more empowered through the ability to take direct action without governmental repercussion. If a murder or rape was to take place, presumably certain people would take it upon themselves to take justice into their own hands, as is their right within a system of direct action.
Although a problem I see occurring with this would be, as an example, something similar to the Salem witch trials. Without a more rigid system of laws concerning evidence, trial, etc, what's to stop people from claiming justice just to get rid of people they don't like? Furthermore, say someone does take rightful justice by killing someone who killed their brother or whatever, what if that man's brother, ignorant (intentionally or not) of the original crime, chooses to take revenge on that man.
There are plenty of cases, even in our current system, where people after killing in (in some cases alleged) self-defense found themselves on the receiving end of direct action from the friends or family of the person they, in their mind rightfully, killed.
Overall, though, I think libertarianism represents a lot of very good notions, and I look forward to learning more about it in class.
I agree with libertarians to an extent. I feel they should stay out of our business as far as our personal business. When it comes to things such as security both nationally and personally they should still have some say because they have more control in cases such as that. If they left it up to people then you would have more crimes being done and killing and violence. If the government could be involved with us but limited to involvement I feel the world may be better.
ReplyDeleteDemetrius Dixon
TR 9:35
In my own opinion the governments only true way of being in our business is that we have too pay taxes, other then that it doesn't really effect us on a local level. As in the last question everyday anarchist kicks in. The government isn't holding your hand watching your every move you make those choice yourself to brake the law. Its one thing if you get caught but other then that to live a Libertarian Life Style we shouldn't have to pay taxes too anyone and be self sustainable.
ReplyDeleteDominic Vaccaro
TR 9:35 PS
The libertarianism guidelines kind of remind of a child parent role. The children do what they want until they mess up or need help, so the parent steps in. I understand what they are saying, but libertarianism seems unstable to me. We deserve freedom to an extent, but I think having too much freedom could go to our heads and produce more problems. The government doesn't need to have all of the power either, but it should not be limited to just two jobs.
ReplyDeleteCarleigh Underwood
PSCI 100:03
I think the government should have more control. Freedom is great but too much may be a problem. What happens when crimes are present? If the government is only concerned about national defense and contracts, who is going to protect the inside of our nation? I feel like these changed would be made for the worse because our country needs to be governed. We need a "leader" and we need checks and balances to keep our rights intact.
ReplyDeleteMaximum freedom sounds like a fabulous little thought until it becomes a reality. People in the United States have lived under the same pretty controlling type of government for so long now that if it were removed or limited, they wouldn't know what to do with themselves. There are too many people out there that- if given such liberties- would completely destroy the working order of society. The crime rate would be through the roof and the defendant would get? What? A slap on the wrist?
ReplyDeleteThere's no way we as a nation could control ourselves in a sophisticated and orderly manner for any extended period of time. It would end up being another civil war. Libertarianism and Anarchism simply just sound like good ideas to some people. Sure, people may be generally good at heart and capable of making delegated and just decisions in their everyday lives. But we need rules, we need regulations, we need a form of government to watch over us. It's just what we're used to. It's sad but true.
Casey DeHaven
PSCI 100:02 MWF 11-12
Government agencies such as the food and drug administration would not exist under a libertarian government leaving to many things to question. People would not have the necessary things regulated for them to remain safe in society. Corporations would have to much freedom and it would result in a battle for power over the people, so in this case the government needs to do more than just two things or society will be controlled by someone or another either way.
ReplyDeleteLet’s face it; we don’t live in a Walgreen’s world. We aren’t perfect, were not all kind, and sometimes were quite selfish. This is why we mustn’t have anarchy and must have our government. The government ensures our safety, consequences, and freedom. I’m sure many of you will disagree that the government ensures our freedom, and can quickly spout out ways the government restricts our freedom. However, just as quickly I can throw back several instances and ways the government has protected our freedom. First and foremost we all know that freedom is more than the 10 basic rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.
ReplyDeleteFreedom is getting a decent education for free. Of course the food sucks, but it is impossible to provide a gourmet meal for $1.75. Now I’m sure those of you that have jobs have complained at least once about paying your taxes, but someone has to pay for the education you were given, the transportation provided, and the teachers who taught you.
Freedom is walking down the street and feeling fairly certain someone wasn’t going to beat you up and take your shoes, but in the instance someone really liked your shoes the police were just a phone call away. Now who pays for the police, why of course you do with your taxes. But think of it like an insurance plan, you pay for it regularly and then when you really need it, it’s there and they don’t expect you to hand them $20 for their work.
Freedom is equal opportunities. Granted our country has not given equal opportunities for everyone I would like to note that women have the same rights as men. In many countries women are still treated like property, servants to their husbands.
Having said that, I can say with conviction that our government certainly has flaws, but everyday our government gets better and more “fair”. So which is it, do you want protection, rights, and order. Or do you want uncertainty, lawlessness, and injustice, because you cant have both!
Alicia White
MWF 11-12
Jessica Fort : I agree with you completely! People don't realize the drastic lifestyle change would an anarchical or libertarian lifestyle would create. It's just a lot of people point fingers and things come array when the quality of education is different but that falls under it's flaws.
DeleteMost people are frustrated with the government and would like nothing more than to do away with it. Furthermore, after having discussed anarchism, a limited government sounds much better than the system we currently live under. I think we could also apply some of the results of anarchism to this libertarian setting, hoping that without the violence of the government there could be more peace among the people. However, just like with anarchism, it would impossible to prevent all violent acts. Also like anarchism, I feel that this type of government would require having the notion that people are good, and that they could get along with each other regardless of the added freedom in their lives.
ReplyDeleteKatelyn Amspacher
PSCI 100:03
These ideas of government would be an interesting experiment. If we the people were less oppressed by the current system of government maybe things would change for the better and then again maybe things would exponentially get worse. As we discussed in class, almost any form of government construct can look good on paper. However, we all know nothing will ever topple the black hole we call Democracy. With that being said, I favor a Libertarian style of government in the alternate reality these ideas exist within.
ReplyDelete-Richard McClung
These two roles of the government are the basic ones, but if we think about contracts we have the written and unwritten ones; written don't need explanation, unwritten ones are those that we all abide by, as we do not use, wear, or take anything that belongs to somebody else, we do want the government to help protect our property. This is done through the Judicial system. It is a big role by the government, and due to the fact that the more the people the more the problems, it is in my opinion a necessity.
ReplyDeleteIf we look around to other countries, we can discover that this country we live in is not as bad as we think. We actually are free to do most of our business on a regular basis, and we sometimes take for granted that what we have today it was not allowed yesterday. We enjoy 8 hour work days because people fought for that, children do not work at the age of 4 because people fought for that, and we could add to this list a lot of other things that we are free to do.
In reference to our taxes the money goes to benefit the community, we may not agree in everything that is spent, but if the local or federal government do not do some of these public works somebody else has to, and nobody will do it for free.
And last but not least, Freedom for me, is a use and abuse word that most people do not really know the meaning. I lived under a dictatorship for thirteen years, I can tell you this is one of the best places to live, it's not perfect, but it is home.
About the dictatorship? That is for another day.
By Janet Loue
DeleteI believe the libertarian idea of having government for issues of national defense is a good one. However, I don't think it should be necessary to have government enforcement of contractual agreements between individuals. If you have the capability of entering into a contract with another without coercion then you should also have the ability to deal with the consequences of that agreement. I believe that people should have this freedom and are capable of such but if a large amount of freedom was given to Americans all at once it would cause tremendous shock and it would be a while until we could function effectively with government removed.
ReplyDeleteKayla McFarland PSCI 100.03
The government should have three roles in people lives,firstly enforce contractual agreements between people and businesses,secondly provide national defense, and finally a government to take care of situations that have to do with foreign affairs. I believe in a strong but limited government and if government would stick to these three reasons the country would have less problem. When people are free to live as they choose they don't tend to act aggressively, because they don't see the point to it. The reason a society would work with limited government is because people will live freely ; and also have that security that government will do its job to protect its citizens. That mean we still need the police patrolling the area, that still means that we need to be able to have our own guns, that still means that we need security in buildings.We still needs these things because a society will always have enemies and we need to be ready for anything. If the government somehow collapses we need to do our duty as citizens and protect our country. A libertarian society will work but with a few modifications.
ReplyDelete-Carlos Amaya
Depending on the thoughts of the business owners and how the economic marking is doing people's daily lives could change immensely. In my opinion and with some of my experiences people tend to abuse power and freedom when given too much. For example if someone is unemployed they would not have a contract to state how much they are going to be paid and the government wouldn't have the minimum wage laws. They could essentially pay you whatever they feel like paying you. I believe the government needs to have some power to be able to help its people in situations like that. I have worked at some large corporate companies and one small family business and I know even with the hard work I did for them if they could they would pay me less.
ReplyDeleteAlicia Himes PSCI 100.02
I actually really like the Libertarian point of view on the government. The governments job should be to protect the people, not manage them. Throughout the years, as more and more laws get created, it seems that the United States gets worse and worse. I do think there should be a few more things however that should not be privatized, those being foreign affairs, and public roads and transportation. I think that if almost all business was privatized, the economy would sort itself out. Prices and goods would be determined by supply and demand and not by what a small group of people think we need/want.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Smead Psci 100:03
I think the libertarian aspect makes sense, I don't like how the government rules my every move. Besides national security the government should let the people rule themselves and live how we feel is necessary. Every year that passes it feels like the government is growing stronger and controlling the people as if we live in a giant prison.
ReplyDeleteNick Bakos Psci 100:03
I agree that the libertarian views make sense, I do not like when the government controls my daily decisions. I agree with having a national defense system in place by the government. I do not want a government that is too big, and controls everything.
ReplyDeleteBrenna Rose PSCI 100-03
If the government only held those two basic roles of defense and enforcing contracts I'm sure people with wonder about other parts controlled by the government like public education. I think there is no possible way to make everyone in society happy with a single form of government.
ReplyDeleteJoey Diaz PSCI 100.03
I feel that the government is too involved with everyone's lives. Therefore I am slightly agreeing with what libertarians think. The government should give people a chance to think for themselves or find a solution by working with the community to answer their problems. But if the community can not solve the problem then I would hope that the government would step in, but at least give us a chance to settle the problem first. I can not think of a major con to libertarianism at this moment, but I feel that America would be a better place with limited government, some people may not agree but this is just how I feel.
ReplyDeleteAmanda Malave
PSCI 100.02
I do believe that the government is overly involved in people's lives today to an extent. But, I also feel that we, the people, have made government come to this from unjust crimes within the country. And, not all parts of government are bad.I do not agree with everything that they do, because they are nowhere near perfect, but the government does more than over monitor our lives. They do good as well by ensuring for most areas that our communities are habitable monitoring clean water and air, provide public education, provide public transportation and more... I like the idea of the individual libertarian freedoms, but I do not see our society functioning without the control of government.
ReplyDeleteShannon Lyons
PSCI 100:03
I agree that the government is way to involved in our lives. It is sooo nice that they do give us the necessities such as air water, shelter, education and so on and so forth. It is also scary to think that it could all be taken away from us as quickly as it was given to us. I also agree that we have had some part in making our government the way it is, such as voting people in and also the way that we all act. I really agree with the individual libertarian freedoms and I think that our society would function well on their views and ideas.
DeleteI dont believe that every single person in one nation will ever agree that one form of government is the right form for that nation. If the government only had control over defense and enforcing contracts, the public as a whole would lose so much all together. Yes, everyone likes their own business and it is a nice idea for the government to be less involved but ultimately I think that would weaken ones nation.
ReplyDeleteI have the same basic issues with Libertarianism as I do with Anarchy. While I think I am more in line with the Libertarian perspective, I still feel as though certain laws and rules would need to be in place. Police officers and some kind of authority would need to be in place to protect the citizens from each other, and not just national security. My biggest issue with anarchy is that, in my opinion, it's weak to attack. Libertarianism has national security but what about protecting it's people from each other. I also don't believe you could take a nation used to rules and regulations and put them in either situation. But if it were a gradual change to either libertarianism or anarchism people might be less likely to embrace selfishness and actually help each other and learn to function without the guidance of government and the laws regulating that are in effect now.
ReplyDeleteRyan Miller
PSCI 100:02
I don't believe that the government should have any more control over our daily lives as they already do. But at the same time, I think too little control, meaning more freedom, could go to some people's head, like others have said. Although, not everyone will take that freedom and wreak havoc. There will be those that will just continue live their lives like they are now. I also think that the government should be more focused on defense, rather than the offensive war-making they basically do now. Offensive war-making is like being the kid who's so full of himself, thinking he can do whatever he wants and not have a single problem or consequence, (lame example, but whatev). If the government would just sort of take a step back and focus more on defense, I think a lot of international issues would eventually fade away, because we aren't trying to get into every other country's business and start a war because of supposed nuclear missiles.
ReplyDeleteMegan Douglas
PSCI 100-02
Libertarianism may cease to exist in a perfect world, but lets face it, we do not live in a perfect world. In our country, we need government to have more power than just two roles. Our government protects our freedoms through the many laws it imposes. Although people don't agree with the power the government has, it does guarantee us with rights and provides us with many different resources. Without a strong government people would be very confused as to what rules to live by. For the longest time people have been under a hierarchy, and most people are fine with that because of the structure it provides.
ReplyDelete-CaraMason
What about murder? In an ideal libertarian world there would be nothing to stop murder. I haven't signed a contract with every single person in the country saying that neither of us will murder the other, and it would be ridiculous to expect me to. By being in this country, I am under forced contract, along with everybody else, to not murder each other. We are also under many other forced contracts, or laws, because it would be ridiculous to expect us to form all of these contracts individually.
ReplyDeleteAlex Smith
PSCI 100:02
One of the most enjoyable and enlightening studies of political thought has been that of the libertarian slant. When the question of government and its role comes up, the libertarians that I’ve had the pleasure to speak with put forth extraordinarily reasoned positions, some that make me say “Wow!” When I do say that, I’m told not to be so astonished. The answer to government is this US Constitution, always has been, and the concerns of government interference in our lives today is due to our acquiesces when government acts outside of the constitutional constraints as it was designed by the founders.
ReplyDeleteOn the issue of contracts, the libertarian would call the Constitution a contract between the government and the people with the government in breach of that contract and point out the 18 enumerated powers in Article 1 Section 8. They believe in civil courts to settle disputes between people, however, they feel corporations and special interests have made it too costly for an individual to have a fair chance in the court system. Speaking of courts, they’ll immediately address the Supreme Court, taking you back to Marbury v. Madison and will take no issue with stating that the people are the interrupters of the Constitution, to amend it when changes are required, not twelve people wearing black dresses making law from the bench. The courts job is to measure a law verses the Constitution, not to determine or finding new meanings to it.
With the issue of national defense, they would gut the military industrial complex, again using the Constitution as the answer, citing the need for a Navy, the revitalization of the state militias, comprised of the whole community as outlined in the Militia Act of 1792, not the fat bastards running around in the woods saying they are the militia. The Army would be only a fraction of what it is today. They argue that terrorism is a crime and a tactic not an excuse to invade nations unless that terrorism was state sponsored. They argue that true security is at the local level and explaining that we do have rights but we have duties too.
Kevin Wetzel
PSCI 100/324
Jessica Fort PSCI100:2 (THIS IS MY 9TH TIME TRYING TO POST HERE)
ReplyDeleteI believe the libertarian notion is better, because in a anarchical society you can just assume everyone will behave in good nature. Although libertarians are not far off, trust in the invisible hand of free markets has failed us before there needs to be government intervention.
Giving to much freedom would change the United State immensely in negative way, giving people to much freedom can, what would anyone have any reason to commit to any work or contract. Progress in any aspect I believe would be slowed or stopped because people would want to it on their own time.
Only in a perfect world where the only involvement in peoples daily lives was defensive wars and enforcing contracts will the government be needed in that way. I believe the government should be in our lives less however they are able to pay for many things such as providing financial aid and establishing institutions. However for them manipulate states in order to pass what they have on their agenda can simply not be justified. If the government was limited to these roles many potential problems can emerge.
ReplyDeleteIf the government was limited to these two roles their would be no branch of people for collecting taxes and there for money distribution could be limited and rich areas could get richer whereas communities that are poor with low income workers money would be limited in their community and will deteriorate with out funds to improve peoples living conditions.
Ben Howar PSCI 100:02
I agree with what many people above have said; the government has too much involvement in a lot of the personal aspects of our lives. I think the libertarian ideals are on the right track toward a better working system, but not completely there. I believe that national defense is important as well as the contractual aspect of the libertarian process. I also think that it is important to have government involved at least somewhat in things such as policy and regulation which play a part in our everyday lives; without the government doing this, we would probably be lost for awhile.
ReplyDeleteHaley Smith
PSCI 100:02
What I believe in is that the Government should stay out of people's business all together. I think the the "government" should be ruled by the people, for the people. Today's government has been overly complicated with rules and policies that take advantage of the american people. We are unaware of the fine lines in today's government and when we do find out, they are either erased from the public view or it is too late. We see in American History where the U.S government was simple and did not need to be convoluted. It was a time where life was simple in the New World and when laws were not so difficult to understand. Now the simple American way of living has been dramatically affected by today's leader's on capitol hill. Greediness clouds members of congress and senators alike and stray away from their political plans and begin to take advantage of the people. I would like to see the U.S government go back to when they were. They did not need drones to spy on people, laws were around to promote the common man in this country, and where the U.S government wasn't filled to the brim with conniving, greedy people. In Conclusion, I personally believe that the U.S government should follow a more libertarian approach where they only should have 2 roles and 2 roles only.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the libertarian position on many things is idealistic and more often than not, impossible in the real world. Libertarians are in love with the free market, but a totally free market just does not work. A free market can only work in a situation where everyone has perfect information and is a rational actor, something that is a very rare occurrence in the real world. Additionally, in a libertarian society, all of the power is held by private individuals and groups, with little to no accountability. If you want to make a change in this environment, good luck. At least in our current situation a regular person has some (very small) amount of power to change who is in charge.
ReplyDeleteJoseph Smith
PSCI 100:02
I do not think that the libertarian take on government is better. There are certain aspects where I believe that things still need to be regulated. I believe that the FDA (although its not perfect) is a good thing to have and keep. Work hours and minimum wage should be universal across the board. If you work someone too hard you revert back to the late 19th early 20th centuries before regulation was put into place. I guess when it comes down to regulation I stand by the collective standpoint. If its good for the majority of the people then it should probably stay in place.
ReplyDeleteIf the government reverted back to the bare bones where it only enforced contracts and protection of the overall population it would resemble the Articles of Confederation. Which could barely hold onto the those two purposes. They couldn't tax in order to pay for the "common defense" which is problematic when you have lets say a rebellion in a state and no other states will come to aid. You had during that time period (post-American Revolution) state and local governments unable to fix anything. It wasn't until the Constitution centralized (which is still not perfect) everything you saw things get fixed. The issue of debt was now the national government. But they could now tax and pay off the debts they owed at least now. Which meant they could raise an army if need be.
100_02
DeleteI definitely think that the nation would be different if we chose to follow liberatarian rules. I am on the fence as to whether or not I think it is good for the country. I think that there are certain things we need the government for such as federal aid, disaster relief, and intervention for national defense. However, when it comes to more social issues, such as abortion or gay rights, the government should not have a say because all of those things have to do with someone's personal life choices. I think if the government were to only take on those two roles, a lot more could be done in terms of economics and defense and international relations because they would not need to concern themselves with social issues. I think that social freedom would make for a happier nation but the government should have control over monetary and other aspects of life because lack of control in those areas could lead to chaos/corruption in the world.
ReplyDeleteHaley Greene
PCSI 100.02
I feel as though my responses are very similar in both blogs. Similar to what someone said earlier, I would love for the government to stop watching every single move I make. Not everyone is the same person clearly, so to an extent to prevent chaos there needs to be laws and regulations. I think the government should have control of more than two laws but not control of things to the extent they have currently.
ReplyDeletePSCI 100
Nicole Ruane
I feel that the government needs to be more controlling than a libertarian view. If the government only took care of those two things we would have constant issues and lawsuits and chaos. We need the government for things such as schooling and national defense. The government should not control things such as whether a man and another man could get married or a woman and another woman. I do not think they should be able to listen in and monitor almost everything we do but I do believe they need to have more involvement than simply enforcing contracts and preventing harm.
ReplyDeleteKayla Motheral
I wouldn't mind living in a libertarian society as long as the the government kept up with national defense. I also believe they should have a few laws such as no murder or thieft. If the government did this and nothing else it would be a great society to live in.
ReplyDeleteMike Reed
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do think that government would be better if they were limited in our lives. I agree with the government only stepping in if to enforce contracts and provide national defense. This would change people's lives drastically because we could all legally do whatever we want and be free from all government coercion as long as we do not break any contracts. I think this would be better for our lives but I would add that the government should step in when it comes to people inflicting harm on to others- another libertarianist ideal. I think it is important that the government take on the role of protecting all citizens from harm.
ReplyDeleteMaggie Nevin
PSCI 100:03