And one might add an additional condition, wherein they view themselves as being adversely affected by big government. For example, paying taxes that go to welfare payments, or being told by the EPA that they cannot build something on their own property, etc.
Big government is civilisation.
Small government is Somalia, and other anarchic hell holes.
Banning smoking ads etc. is “Nanny State” government.
And are there actually any genuine communist states left ?
Unless of course, its too complicated for you to notice the difference between say, the U.K. and the old Soviet Union.
(But never mind, it makes a nice quickly identifiable "scare"soundbite, doesn’t it !)
sorry if I did not explain my self well here .May be I’m reading posts that are libertarians that go on to say that liberals and conservatives are big government and controls things and get in people house. If so that that would be true has there been no libertarian or true free country of civil liberties.
The posts I’m reading about confederate supporters or tea party are probably not 100% right. It true government in 18 century and 19 century was much smaller and states had more rights than the 20 century and of today.But the confusion I have and I think some confederate supporters or tea party people have it was not true libertarian society at least on social issues.
I just feel that some confederate supporters , tea party people or conservatives may be cherry picking and I’m getting confused.
Also I think there may be some people that don’t fully understand the constitution and US founding fathers has I get vibe from them they where very suspicious of government and too much government power . It may be true to some degree that because the US is republican system not a Parliamentary system there more check of balance of power and states rights have more power than other countries.And the US constitution perfects people more.
This is where I think I’m getting confused.
I think problem is big government is not define.
Ask a conservative what big government is and you get anti- welfare state and anti social programs but you get big government when it comes to morality and vice , sex ,smoking ,drinking and drugs so on and pushing god in society .
Ask a liberal and they will say big government in my house,work place and my body like abortion , gays and lesbian , sex ,morality and so on.
Ask a libertarian they would say both conservative and liberals are big government and both on economics and social issues.
Where conservative are big government on social issues and smaller government on economics where liberals are big government on economics but smaller government on social issues.
Where libertarians will say both on economics and social issues need to be little to no government.
You can’t really put in communism because communists hate capitalism where conservatives ,liberals and libertarians are pro capitalism.
Some socialist and far left may be critical of free market and capitalism system and will like to control it a bit to make it far where has communist want to do way with it.
Sez you. But most people in this country, and in the world, disagree.
What you don’t understand is that government is whatever people say it is, not what people with extreme views want it to be.
To take just two examples:
Education is a role of government. Children from poor families need to get educated as much as children from rich ones do, and they are not personally responsible for being poor. Even if you don’t like government run schools, you’d still be taking money from those who have it and giving it for education to those who don’t, which you don’t seem to like.
Mediator - so, you are against courts and civil trials? That appears to be one of the very first roles of government. Remember King Solomon and the baby?
Try again. This is incoherent.
SS is exactly there to force people to save for their retirement. As big business continues to screw the middle class, fewer people have spare money for retirement, so SS is even more necessary than it was when lots of people could depend on pensions. And I fail to see how it has anything to do with infrastructure spending - it is a different pot of money.
And with trivial changes SS will be there when you retire - unless anti-SS fanatics kill it, that is. Reagan did it, so can we.
It is not communism or socialism. It does incorporate some ideas that communists/socialists had before, or almost before, anyone else. E.g., the Communist Manifesto calls for universal public education, which is considered a no-brainer nowadays, and at that time the U.S. already was committed to it in public policy (the Northwest Ordinance provided for land to be reserved for schools in all the townships of the newly-settled territories). As for universal health care – Bismarck, who was no socialist, did that first, actually, and old-age pensions too; and he did it to forestall the political advance of socialism in Germany. But socialists might have thought of it first. FDR (with similar intent to Bismarck’s, probably, at least in part) also borrowed a lot of planks from the platform of the American Socialist Party, e.g., Social Security.
I did not explain my self well . Normally the vibe I get from people who blame big government say liberals and conservatives got the idea from soviet union , FDR , Nazi Germany both on economics and social issues .
Has government in the 18 century and 19 century where more classic liberals.
I understand it was not true libertarians but smaller than the 20 and 21 century.
my favorites are those repubs who bitch and moan about big government, but they have a kid with a profound mental disabilty and they start screaming for them to be educated (even thou they may not even know who their mother is) I like too how they like low taxes and then wonder why there’s no services for their kid.
I disagree. Sure, some people feel this way, but some people are genuinely opposed to, or at least conflicted about, big government in general.
Here in America at least, the government has taken on more and more that didn’t use to be its job. It’s not hard to imagine why people might think this was a disturbing trend, or idealize the earlier times when people were (supposedly) more free and self-sufficient and saw to their own affairs without a lot of government interference.