@LeopoldBloom No. Obviously there are some functions government must perform. The first duty of government is to protect the physical wellbeing of its citizens.
I'm against Socialism for nongovernmental functions.
Protecting the citizenry provides the means to protect the dignity of the individual.
@HoraceGreenley Nongovernmental functions is a circular definition. It’s nongovernmental because the government is not doing it. That doesn’t mean government [b]shouldn’t [/b] do it. You could privatize law enforcement by requiring everyone to hire a private security service, for example. I used to live in an unincorporated area where I had to pay for trash pickup and fire protection.
@HoraceGreenley In a complex society like ours, it's not a binary choice between the government holding up its end of the contract, or not holding it up at all. I think the government's doing a great job protecting us from foreign invasion, not so great protecting us from an invading virus. Also, a federal system is going to be more complicated.
There is no justification for our bloated military, although the government spending on it is so pervasive, that the economy would collapse if it were stopped suddenly. If that's not socialism, then nothing is. It's also not a binary choice between a military that costs more than those of the next ten countries combined, and no military at all.
This is what happens when you think in extremes. We can't discuss reforming the police because it's either what we have now or no police.
@HoraceGreenley Thomas Jefferson lived in a very different society, where the U.S. was an agrarian backwater, where women couldn't vote and black people were property. There's no reason to deify him just because he was smart and well-read. Many of his ideas don't apply to a modern world power.
But if you're going to be a strict originalist, Jefferson would not have supported a permanent federal standing army, certainly not the monstrosity we have today. He would have supported a navy, however.
@LeopoldBloom I am a strict originialist. The changing society doesn't matter. Jefferson would agree with me...we find these truths to be self-evident. That's why the US has the oldest continually operating form of government in the world.
Historical and economic studies demonstrate that spending 5% of GDP is the optimal amount. 5% of GDP is the US historical average from 1775 to 1985. We are spending less than that now.
@HoraceGreenley Also the founding fathers were against the idea of a standing army like the US has today because they saw in Europe how such militaries had a nasty habit of overthrowing the government. That was a huge part of why the 2nd Amendment was a thing. So you kind of blow up your own argument if you want to be a strict constitutionalist.
And if you think the changing world doesn't matter you are at best a dinosaur and at worst delusional.
And I don't get where you get these myths and legends about the US being the oldest operating form of government in the world. The US is barely a flash in the pan.
@HoraceGreenley The reason we have such a bloated military is to maintain the American empire. We have over 700 overseas bases, from massive installations to "lily pads." We are the very definition of an empire even if we don't maintain traditional colonies.
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow If you don't know that the US has the oldest continually operating form of government in the world then you don't know history well enough to understand me.
@HoraceGreenley Depends how you define “continuously operating.” We still have the 1787 Constitution, but our modern government would be unrecognizable to any of the people who wrote it.
@HoraceGreenley That is factually and logically false. The US system is a tweaked version of the Westminster Parliamentary system. It is literally impossible to be a variation on an existing system and claim to be the oldest at the same time. That doesn't even follow logically.
