No Goverment...Good or Bad?

[Ubernaut]

Should We Have A Goverment? Yah I know its kinda a dumb Question But Seriouly....

[fatguy3232]

people need government just not a lot of it because the larger the government the less effective they are in dealing with people problems

[Idiot-Finder]

Better than anarchy.

[Thread-Killer]

I don't think it's really possible for human society to work without a central governing authority. Even if you get rid of your government, the power vacuum will just cause another to spring up. How would you prevent that?

[fatguy3232]

At 11/18/07 06:19 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Better than anarchy.

There is no such thing as anarchy there needs to be sum sort of support system for people (tribes, gangs, packs) if an anarchist(sorry if I spelled that wrong) revolution does happen the government will most likely go back to a feudal system

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

we need big goverment

[TheBlueBullet]

Eh, I'm against a big government. No, I don't think the gov. is evil and it should be abolished because there are some positive elements to having a government. But I firmly believe that cities should regulate themselves so the PEOPLE would have more control over it instead of some dumb asses in Washington who think they know best. (When they don't)

Overall there needs to be at least some government or else there would be chaos. Man can't trust others on word alone.

[Grammer]

Anarchy never made sense to me. You people want your health care and social security, but you don't want a government to regulate it, to hold companies accountable (assuming there are even companies), you just want all the pleasures of a government, but none of the things that you may or may not hinder your freedom.

Let me break it down for you all what anarchy means.

- Police forces are voluntary. No specialized training, and if there is, no federal guidelines to say who's qualified.

- No Congress, which means no federal investigations. You suspect Barry Bonds is taking steroids? Oh, too bad, he left town. No FBI to hunt him down, better get on the phone to the mayor of the town over. Oh wait, no mayor, and electric companies decided to shut down your power because your hick little town just isn't worth cost of getting those power lines up those steep mountain hills. Better get on horseback and spread the word.

- No social security. Period. What? You're disabled and can't work? Here's a cup, and there's a street. Get begging.

- No organized military. Get some pitchforks and torches, the Mongolians are coming.

- No federal standards on roads. Oh shit, there's a pothole? Set up a charity, we can't afford this.

- No minimum wage.

[Theonlyidiot]

having a government is what keeps this world together as some people wish to follow while others wish to lead
in some cases, if the followers lack a leader they will eventually crumble and all goes to hell
but, the followers need to keep thier leaders in check as to make sure the leaders do not overpower the followers, as some will always be against something
governments should be kept in power, no matter how big or small, its better than anarchy

[OrbitalDebris]

Where ever there are two people, there is a power heirachry.

[DarkMageRubius]

Look at the Def. of Anarchy, Pure, it would work. BUT, who really would believe all people would work together in unison? Exactly. If you want to know about governments and such I suggest you look at Wiki. there you could decide what would be ideal for you. Just like anyone who needs religion, no?

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

anarchy fails man

[therealsylvos]

At 11/18/07 07:13 PM, Grammer wrote:

- Police forces are voluntary. No specialized training, and if there is, no federal guidelines to say who's qualified.

ok, in this situation I'm sure there will be natural ways to say who is qualified. if you are still alive, you are qualified.

- No Congress, which means no federal investigations. You suspect Barry Bonds is taking steroids? Oh, too bad, he left town. No FBI to hunt him down, better get on the phone to the mayor of the town over. Oh wait, no mayor, and electric companies decided to shut down your power because your hick little town just isn't worth cost of getting those power lines up those steep mountain hills. Better get on horseback and spread the word.

I don't see a problem with this, let ml not let bonds play anymore as is their prerogative, and let the companies decide what to do with their product, as is their prerogative, I'm just gonna have to adapt.

- No social security. Period. What? You're disabled and can't work? Here's a cup, and there's a street. Get begging.

tough luck man, what do you want from me?

- No organized military. Get some pitchforks and torches, the Mongolians are coming.

When was the last time someone invaded switzerland?

- No federal standards on roads. Oh shit, there's a pothole? Set up a charity, we can't afford this.

It is in anyone who travels on the road to fix a pothole, eventually when there is a big enough need it will get fixed.

- No minimum wage.

Whatever someone is willing to work for is what he should be paid brah.

[Christopherr]

There's already a thread about anarchy... Actually, a lot of threads.

[fahrenheit]

At 11/18/07 11:13 PM, therealsylvos wrote: ok, in this situation I'm sure there will be natural ways to say who is qualified. if you are still alive, you are qualified.

That still doesnt set up who regulates it, or has any way of organization.
There would be no police groups.

When was the last time someone invaded switzerland?

About the same time people didnt care if they wanted europe pissed off at them.

It is in anyone who travels on the road to fix a pothole, eventually when there is a big enough need it will get fixed.

Or that people will find a different route.

Whatever someone is willing to work for is what he should be paid brah.

Or forced into slavery, whichever.

[Sajberhippien]

I'd like to point out that lack of government isn't equal to anarchy; You could have a society with for example direct democracy and no government where there would still be laws, social security, and everything like that.

Remember that a communism, when in place, has no government, for example.

[velvet-nightmare]

As Grammer so wonderfully put it, we need a goverment or sorts. I think the best kind of Goverment would be one with more influence from the people, however it is their final say.

There are so many laymam opinions about how we'd run the world, views on immirgration, tax, the doll but when it comes down to it we're not the ones who have the budget set out infront of us, who have to enforce thelaw and impliment everything behind it.

Why not take up politics and try to make a difference, but the fact of the matter is we all want running water, eductaion, security and someone to enforce this - which we wouldn't have if there was no goverment.

Keeping that all in mind i belive that if i was in charge there would be a few changes, i think the question should be "what is the right kind of goverment" rather than "should there be a goverment"

[K-RadPie]

At 11/18/07 11:13 PM, therealsylvos wrote: When was the last time someone invaded switzerland?

When was the last time Switzerland had no organized military?

[velvet-nightmare]

At 11/19/07 07:11 AM, K-RadPie wrote:

At 11/18/07 11:13 PM, therealsylvos wrote: When was the last time someone invaded switzerland?

When was the last time Switzerland had no organized military?

ROFL

[Chickidydow]

Government is good and the only thing that we will ever have, anarchy is a silly concept and never going to happen. As long as government doesn't go all big brother on us we should be ok. We humans are social animals, and like any other social animals we tend to develop structure to our lives, dogs work in packs where you have a highest and a lowest ranking member. Lions live in prides with each lion having a role to fill. Humans live in social groups called families, branching into bigger community groups and then into countries. its always been that way and always shall be that way.

[K-RadPie]

At 11/19/07 07:17 AM, velvet-nightmare wrote:

At 11/19/07 07:11 AM, K-RadPie wrote: When was the last time Switzerland had no organized military?

ROFL

*cough*

[Idiot-Finder]

At 11/18/07 06:25 PM, fatguy3232 wrote:

At 11/18/07 06:19 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Better than anarchy.

There is no such thing as anarchy there needs to be sum sort of support system for people (tribes, gangs, packs) if an anarchist(sorry if I spelled that wrong) revolution does happen the government will most likely go back to a feudal system

That's why I said " Better than anarchy ", it'll never work.

[swiftpeach]

Here is a breif picture with a world with out governments

Nothing, we are animals, ugg ugg

Governments are any kind of leadership group wether it be a tribal leader in Papua New Guinea or The President of the united states and the rest of the government that follows that.

With out a government or any kind of leadership figrue, research would stop, we would have no electricity, internet, alot of people would die due to law enforcement being everyones problem, not just police. More would die because of famine, Even more would die because of Epidemics.
Not to mention currancey would cease to exist.

you might class Government as a ruling body for a nation

But a goverment can be your soemthing as mundane like: boss at work.... he is "Governing" what you do, he rewards you for taking his crap and doing what he tells you by paying you. The same way a government should give you access to the basic amenities, provided you work and you do your tiny bit to make the country a little better.
Our national governments are much the same as our boss, except we in most cases elect our own bosses, because we beleive that they are the best person to represent us and they will do the most for us. We put up with their shit and they reward us by giving us cheap schooling, Social Services, Limited Hospital Cover, ETC.

Thats my two cents, i could right more but its almost 1 in the morning and i have work tomorrow , (and i am tired as well)

I hope it made sense and was intelligible

[swiftpeach]

When was the last time someone invaded switzerland?

- No federal standards on roads. Oh shit, there's a pothole? Set up a charity, we can't afford this.

Nazi germany had no need to invade switzerland by the realisation that due to its extremely strong stance on nuetrality, they would not attack germany or cause any trouble as long as the swiss population were not harmed and switzerland was not invaded.

Mainly due to the realisation that switzerlands rocky land scape would tie up much needed men and it wouldn't be worth the men for what the country has to offer holds, a couple of million people and some cheese makers and banks....

Oh and FYI, Switzerland is a hugely econimcal power compared to the surface area of the country.
So in relation to that, chances are you used a bad example.

Try some where like Australia where i live.... its so vast here if there is a pot hole it isa case of set up a charity because if it isn't on a main road in the city or the surrounds.... It isn't going to get fixed in a hurry(In our respect we do deal with the problems that arise tho.)

And there you have it, the reason why switzerland has not been invaded for a very long time.

[RandomFreak]

You can't with either with or without government. With government the people who want the power are almost always the least fit to wield it and you end up with oppressive or innept or usually just self serving governments. So people can't be trusted to govern us. But then with no government and rules and regulations and everybody out for only themselves the whole thing will collapse because a person is not going to help their neighbor if they don't have to. So people can't be trusted to be left alone either. The answer is clear, people are the problem. Armadillos should rule the world.

[Jokeen]

At 11/19/07 12:04 PM, RandomFreak wrote: You can't with either with or without government. With government the people who want the power are almost always the least fit to wield it and you end up with oppressive or innept or usually just self serving governments. So people can't be trusted to govern us. But then with no government and rules and regulations and everybody out for only themselves the whole thing will collapse because a person is not going to help their neighbor if they don't have to. So people can't be trusted to be left alone either. The answer is clear, people are the problem.

it should be dead clowns.

As for your question, this is the problem.

So the question and thing that should be discussed is how should this problem be addressed?

[therealsylvos]

At 11/19/07 12:53 AM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 11/18/07 11:13 PM, therealsylvos wrote: ok, in this situation I'm sure there will be natural ways to say who is qualified. if you are still alive, you are qualified.

That still doesnt set up who regulates it, or has any way of organization.
There would be no police groups.

Of course it regulates it. If you are able to survive it you will.

It is in anyone who travels on the road to fix a pothole, eventually when there is a big enough need it will get fixed.

Or that people will find a different route.

Ok do you see a problem? people will either adapt or change the situation.

Whatever someone is willing to work for is what he should be paid brah.

Or forced into slavery, whichever.

um.... not sure how you made that leap.

[bluedemonspeedracer]

Anarchy usually leads to the formation of new and more repressive forms of government. Take Somallia as an example, look were their country went after years of anarchy. It started from anarchy, then progressed into a terrorial pissing contest between warlords. Then after one of the warlords gained enough power to control of Mogadishu through the fighting between each other, then the warlord becomes a dictator. Then you have a new and more repressive government form. The End. This show that a stable form of anarchy can't exist. Humans cannot govern themselves.

[Grammer]

At 11/18/07 11:13 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 11/18/07 07:13 PM, Grammer wrote:

- Police forces are voluntary. No specialized training, and if there is, no federal guidelines to say who's qualified.

ok, in this situation I'm sure there will be natural ways to say who is qualified. if you are still alive, you are qualified.

Here Billy, this is a gun. Woah there, this might be too heavy for you, try this pepper spray.

- No social security. Period. What? You're disabled and can't work? Here's a cup, and there's a street. Get begging.

tough luck man, what do you want from me?

Hahahaha

- No minimum wage.

Whatever someone is willing to work for is what he should be paid brah.

Slave labor.

[bluedemonspeedracer]

Here is more information on what life is like in complete anarchy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/401714 7.stm