

- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
enterprise society, someone who took a government job, such as sheriff, would be doing it for his own self-interest; it would not be to his self-interest to allow the area to be taken over by criminals. (And also, there might be technical things about the job, such as message transmitting, that might be of professional interest to him). And, of course, these positions would be paid. That is not altruism.
God?...lots of critters and inanimate objects were called gods but to some causation for existence itself, of everything we observe including ourselves and our minds, none of which we played no part in, should logically and gratefully be appreciated...but we don't need an organization (religion) by men nor beast to remind us of that fact.
But most of what we think as government functions are really fee-for-service exchanges, and the people doing them should be seen as ordinary employees, not priestly gatekeepers. And when at all possible, their organizations should be spun off as private companies and be subject to competition. Even police and (non-supreme) courts can be handled this way as long as they are under enough of a central authority to avoid wars among them.
Payment for the privilege of insuring those rights should be commensurate to any similar position in the free market.
Government workers do not deserve more benefits than anyone else gets in the free market economy.
It is a privilege to represent the people but they are NOT privileged in doing so.
The major reason I believe libertarianism is better than what the Democrats offer is that libertarians do not assume either that politicians or bureaucrats are uniquely smart or uniquely trustworthy. Human beings are human beings, and it is better to avoid exposing them in the first place either to problems you or I could not solve or to temptations we might not withstand.
(Though you can't trust all private schools either).
Hmm, interesting...probably why I purposely do not react to marketing...I'll do the opposite most times...won't give em the satisfaction of thinking they have figured me out!
The real problem is the 2 party system, party politics, lack of accountability.
Honestly, our forefathers, if they saw this, would have had rules like term limits, NO running for any future office if you were in elected office and the budget was not balanced. The definition of Quid Pro Quo would be "normalized" to mean ANY arms length transaction, or attempt to hide said transaction. (notice how the IRS can freeze your assets AHEAD of a guilty verdict... But a congresswoman who takes money and promises to vote a certain way... There is no quid pro quo there, eh?)
Marco Rubio went from In Debt, to selling his home, for above market prices, to get out of debt, and get into a new home... Once he became a senator. Hmmm... Methinks this should be criminal.
Being in office should be a LOT MORE Like running a charity. You do it for love of country, and not for personal profits! You do it to give back (while getting paid).
But you DO NOT (Joe Biden), take your son on a plan to China while you are VP, and have your son sign a billion dollar deal with the chinese government. And act like you are helping the downtrodden.
Our republic has gone sour.
They think they won.
We know who lost!
But she also inserted a shrugging Emoji in her Twitter post when she whined about it.
The best response a Millennial socialist nitwit can come up with: shrug!
Load more comments...