What are the responsibilities of an Objectivist government?

Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago to Government
257 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I have listened to everything thing from businesses should pay no taxes to America is not a sovereign country and there should be no regulations on anything. Certainly the government has some responsibilities.

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, laws are typically enforced by the police, whereas regulations are often enforced by the internal gestapo of the regulating agency. That's why all these alphabet soup agencies are outfitting themselves with guns and ammo.
    Heck, the DNR has more authority than your local sheriff - they can confiscate your weapons, vehicle, etc. without any legal finding of breaking a law, merely on the word of the official.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CWhitneyR 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    A law is created by elected representatives of the people, and thus is theoretically created by and for the people. A regulation is created by unelected representatives of the executive (bureaucrats). The result is the same.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    no-not questioning you on having done it-that you absolutely have to now-I didn't have to
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Are you calling me a liar?
    I can show you my Mexican visa from 1994 which indicates that various immunizations had been completed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Boborobdos 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In the context of this thread would you delegate it to the private sector or admit that only a group decision, society, can decide how to deal with such things?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    They can be impeached, but that is left up to Congress, when in my opinion it should rest in some form of citizen revue.

    Take a look at the original 13th Amendment. It offers some interesting thoughts and approaches.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yeah, they talk about it, but they do little to effect it. Objectivist might well do better.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I know there is a lot to say on that. I look at the Supreme Court and I can't believe there is no way to coral or remove them when they go against the constitution. Do we have a mock court hearing and find them guilty. We can't let politics into the court but just take a look at Eric Holder. Ugh.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 2 months ago
    I think we had a pretty good start with the Constitution, but we failed to include an avenue for formal citizen review and corrective action, after election and/or appointment of anyone in any level of government, including the judicial, and we should have incorporated the Declaration of Independence. Though in practice, a Grand Jury, before the state's prosecutors took it over, could and did offer some level on a criminal basis, but it's revue range should be increased to malfeasance. The concept of immunity for any government employee or authority is a gross violation of government of individual and natural liberty. And I think enforced citizen government through term limits is essential.

    There's much more to say, but that's a treatise.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The only way to make that happen is to get the governments hands off of some of these things. That's why conservatives always talk about shrinking the size of the federal government.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    >I disagree. The actions that a company or corporation takes should be considered separate from the actions of individuals.

    I thought you switched your stance.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    kh; Resistant TB has been on the rise in this country since at least the 90's and polio is back, though not quite so virulent as in the 40 and 50's. I encountered both conditions with people around 96, which really amazed me. I'm not comfortable with mandatory vaccination, but as always I stand behind education and probably free vaccinations.

    I agree with your general principle of the right of people to travel freely. But to make it workable, we'd have to eliminate our world wide policing and incessant warring to eliminate the hate we've engendered throughout the world, as well as eliminate welfare. I'd favor a reporting requirement at least annually demonstrating work or schooling or self support. If not showing the ability to support themselves, then deport back to home nation. The right to vote to require naturalization, demonstrating knowledge of basic US history, civics, and English reading and speaking.

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would test for leeching in water, check for pollutants in air. Do you know that a tree is counted as part of the carbon foot print? It is nuts. I could get into all kinds of chemistry here but it would take too long. I will create a separate post later. The whole thing is madness.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's exactly the type of arrangement I was thinking of. I want to design this company, I know the kinds of things they would look for.I know where to go to find the best tests available.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But didn't you just say that it should in your previous post? I'm confused now...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Is the Latin American country in which you live Mexico? I would assume different countries have different requirements for entry.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    How do you determine whether the potential immigrant is going to be productive or not? Simple. Human beings have a natural desire to survive, and they will take any action necessary to achieve that end. In the absence of a government welfare system, the only way for them to provide for their own well-being and ensure their own survival is by either getting a job or starting a business, both of which are productive endeavors.

    So, to answer your question, we can know they will be productive when productivity is the only method of survival, which it would be without government welfare.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm smarter than the audience they try to educate. They can't educate in sound bites. The best thing to do is look at what they don't say.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by rlewellen 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    >We need some agencies consisting of experts to judge the safety (not efficiency or efficacy) of some products. No we don't need it from the government which prone to political corruption and employs people that are not accountable to produce correct results. The free market can take care of checking the safety of products just fine. The consitutions says nothing about lfe liberty and the pursuit if hapiness. I think you'll find that in the declaration of independence. .
    Allow women? Allow as if they had a right to prevent me in the first place? The Constitution was written to limit the power of government not you and I.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Refusing entry to violent criminals seems fine, since there's a rational reason for that, but what do you mean by "perpetually destitute"? That seems like an incredibly vague term...

    As for people with diseases, I'd let them in, but make a hospital their first stop. Unless of course the disease is something highly contagious, in which case I'd keep them quarantined in a hospital close to the border.

    And yes, my approach to immigration is incredibly simple. That's the beauty of it.

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Maphesdus 11 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Okay, so the difference is simply whether or not bad rules can be easily rescinded (or prevented in the first place), while ensuring that politicians and bureaucrats don't give out special government favors to their friends. That seems like an admirable goal.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo