Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Why support politics?

Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 1:25:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Whenever something goes wrong, you can bet that the mainstream will cry for more government regulations. Which regulations? Regulations to stop bad things. Who could object to stopping bad things?

The question I'd like to raise is: "Why government?"

Government is not in a unique position to solve problems. Bill Gates can donate to help Katrina victims, or set up honest and free health insurance, etc. Indeed, private charity has a much better track record than state welfare. http://econlog.econlib.org...

Of course, statists are quick to object that there's "not enough" private charity, but this is exactly why you should have a vocal opinion on it! Work to change the amount of private charity.

Government is also not likely to follow your recommendations because you are only one person. Your influence is far greater if you purchase shares of Google than by voting in public elections. You can also make a much larger difference by donating to private charity.

So if people were consistent, I'd expect people's advocacy to be split 90% private, 10% political, just in terms of the difference you can make and the tools available to you. Instead, we see 2% private 98% political...

One possible answer is that people don't really care about making the world a better place, and they use politics as an emotional playground to showcase fashionable ideologies. I think most people would agree with this answer, but disagree that it applies to them. So why doesn't it apply to you?
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 1:45:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/25/2011 1:25:19 PM, Sieben wrote:
Whenever something goes wrong, you can bet that the mainstream will cry for more government regulations. Which regulations? Regulations to stop bad things. Who could object to stopping bad things?

The question I'd like to raise is: "Why government?"

Government is not in a unique position to solve problems. Bill Gates can donate to help Katrina victims, or set up honest and free health insurance, etc. Indeed, private charity has a much better track record than state welfare. http://econlog.econlib.org...

Of course, statists are quick to object that there's "not enough" private charity, but this is exactly why you should have a vocal opinion on it! Work to change the amount of private charity.:

It's not even true, though. It's a fact that private, US citizens donate 70% more than public donations. The most charitable people on earth are United States, private citizens, exceeding even the US government.

One possible answer is that people don't really care about making the world a better place, and they use politics as an emotional playground to showcase fashionable ideologies. I think most people would agree with this answer, but disagree that it applies to them. So why doesn't it apply to you?:

What happens is that people enabled by the government expect the government to do their charity for them. And what they have to show for their hard-earned tax dollars is FEMA. W00t!
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 1:59:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/25/2011 1:25:19 PM, Sieben wrote:
Whenever something goes wrong, you can bet that the mainstream will cry for more government regulations. Which regulations? Regulations to stop bad things. Who could object to stopping bad things?

The question I'd like to raise is: "Why government?"

Government is not in a unique position to solve problems. Bill Gates can donate to help Katrina victims, or set up honest and free health insurance, etc. Indeed, private charity has a much better track record than state welfare. http://econlog.econlib.org...

Of course, statists are quick to object that there's "not enough" private charity, but this is exactly why you should have a vocal opinion on it! Work to change the amount of private charity.

We do, I support charity and want to see them get everything they need to do good in the world.

The real objection, is that we cannot "make" Bill Gates give his money to charity. We can (though our votes) make government do it. Which is why we use it, because it is the most solid power that we have to make change on a large level.


Government is also not likely to follow your recommendations because you are only one person. Your influence is far greater if you purchase shares of Google than by voting in public elections. You can also make a much larger difference by donating to private charity.

Not really, there are currently 320 million shares of Google, compared to about 130 million that voted in 2008, and so to get the same voting %, you would need about 2.46 shares of stock. As the current market rate for google is $613.93, that means you would have to spend over $1,500 just to get the same voting, and then, you are only voting for one company, not the entire country. So no, you don't really get more out of it, unless you have millions to invest.


So if people were consistent, I'd expect people's advocacy to be split 90% private, 10% political, just in terms of the difference you can make and the tools available to you. Instead, we see 2% private 98% political...

One possible answer is that people don't really care about making the world a better place, and they use politics as an emotional playground to showcase fashionable ideologies. I think most people would agree with this answer, but disagree that it applies to them. So why doesn't it apply to you?

Already stated.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 2:13:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/25/2011 1:59:36 PM, OreEle wrote:

The real objection, is that we cannot "make" Bill Gates give his money to charity. We can (though our votes) make government do it. Which is why we use it, because it is the most solid power that we have to make change on a large level.
But you can't make government do it. Your chances of influencing elections are basically zero. It would be easier to convince one rich person to do something, than convince millions of other people who have no incentive to pay attention in the first place.

Government is also not likely to follow your recommendations because you are only one person. Your influence is far greater if you purchase shares of Google than by voting in public elections. You can also make a much larger difference by donating to private charity.

Not really, there are currently 320 million shares of Google, compared to about 130 million that voted in 2008, and so to get the same voting %, you would need about 2.46 shares of stock. As the current market rate for google is $613.93, that means you would have to spend over $1,500 just to get the same voting, and then, you are only voting for one company, not the entire country. So no, you don't really get more out of it, unless you have millions to invest.

Well first, most people could afford to buy that many shares of google. Second, you don't need control of the whole country, just *enough* to get what you want done... Lastly, you're not screwing up capital structures by appropriating resources by force.

But you missed the point - you can make a greater difference participating in private charity. Expected benefit of voting in public elections = 0. Expected benefit of donating $5 to charity > 0.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 3:17:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I just watched that John Stossel thing on hulu.
-Liberal families' income is 6% more than conservative families
-conservative families give 30% more than liberal families
-conservatives donate more time and blood
-highest class gives the most amount of money, but the lowest working class gives the highest percentage of their income.

Most all people also agree that private charities are much more effective than government run charities/programs of the same goal.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler