Have you ever considered why we choose our systems of government?

follow please · Jan 20, 2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaBaAd

I disagree that greed is good with respects to capitalism and besides greed is NOT a system. Greed is a human characteristic used to divide people whether you label it legal or not. With "greed" comes displaced power.

To quote the words of John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, or Baron Acton, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

Therefore any political system will always be "greedy" due to imperfect man.

Aha you touch down on some of my theory. I don't know if others have already explored it, by my starting point was the fact that greed seems to be a sort of human condition. I spread from there by relating it to every person on the planet, creating global greed. It all took off from there lol. However, I disagree about the fact that anyone who comes to power will have be greedy. I don't think its been seen in government, but I believe that sooner or later someone with come to power who WILL be able to possess the will power to resist such temptations of power, and make one of the greatest to lead a country. Perhaps on that day, a new system will be born. (p.s that's just off the top of my head, I just want opposing viewpoints.)

follow please · Jan 20, 2009, 11:53 AM

[quote=nike 1;1497159]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimGunther

I agree! I majored in government and politics in college and can tell you that one of the main reasons we chose our form of government was in reaction to the types of governments in Europe and England at the time, and in the past.

If you agree sir, you can always rate my answer as such!

But thanks for the further insight. I did not know that communism was not in effect at that time. Can you explain some other forms of government in existence in those days?

Yep, I'm pretty sure the kick start of communism (more so as what we know it today) was Karl Marx writings during the Russian Revolution. They thought it was going to take off in England or some other big country, instead it turned into more of a socialist party in russia.

follow please · Jan 20, 2009, 11:58 AM

ALSO! Would anyone care to share their thoughts on this: Consider the economic crisis the world is in right now, I live in Canada and this is what I'm witnessing. I see people losing jobs, not able to pay rent, no groceries. I'm sitting here thinking, everyone's turing to the government for bailouts, loans, and just plain help, and realizing that it could have a domino effect. Once the people become so dependant on the government, they begin to set stricter regulations, they jack taxes, enforce tighter laws, and aggressive law enforcement. They have to lock us into a narrower path, and this government is starting to remind me of Socialism of the milder type. But like what was stated earlier, man is not perfect, the one in charge can take the power and run with it.

follow please · Jan 20, 2009, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexasParent

Some of your assumptions are a bit off. Communism attempted to narrow the gap between the wealthy and the working class. In a communist state the goal is for everyone to make the same amount of money and have the same lifestyle and simply be happy that they are serving the collective good. The system in theory is the least 'greedy' of them all. However, people will be people and those in power in a communist system wanted special privileges for themselves; it becomes corrupt. But the system itself is not greedy in terms of distribution of wealth, quite the opposite. Is that system good, by most accounts, no.

Capitalism on the otherhand uses greed quite well. It is the drive for more that drives capitalism, which creates economic expansion; hence more more products, inventiveness, and then jobs as people with capital (money) will try to make more of it.

So capitalism is the greedist of all systems, and it has a large disparity between wealthy and the working class; but as the rich get richer, the argument is that the working class will be pulled along with them to a higher standard of living.

Most democracies have capitalism because democracies (the people) will not stand for the government control that communism requires to make sure greed doesn't get out of hand and that all people are making the same or similar amounts of money, etc.

So I don't really understand your point, or you have it backwards. In my opinion, greed is good, greed is capitalism, democracies are capitalistic and greed as a system (provided that the greed is legal and people aren't defrauded of their hard earned money) is what fuels the economies of the world.

Sorry, when I stated the word "system" I assumed it would be realized that they are RUN by people, people will be people. And I'm pretty sure those in government in those systems are damn well off, but the people suffer. There is a huge gap between the higher-ups and the working class. Whaddaya think?

nike 1 · Jan 20, 2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by follow please

ALSO! Would anyone care to share their thoughts on this: Consider the economic crisis the world is in right now, I live in Canada and this is what I'm witnessing. I see people losing jobs, not able to pay rent, no groceries. I'm sitting here thinking, everyone's turing to the government for bailouts, loans, and just plain help, and realizing that it could have a domino effect. Once the people become so dependant on the government, they begin to set stricter regulations, they jack taxes, enforce tighter laws, and aggressive law enforcement. They have to lock us into a narrower path, and this government is starting to remind me of Socialism of the milder type. But like what was stated earlier, man is not perfect, the one in charge can take the power and run with it.

That's a very good point. Because of the fact that corporations and commerce ran things into the ground due to there ways of greed and selfish activities, big brother now has to step in and take charge, but it would be destructive to do so without enacting tighter stipulations upon further progression. Otherwise we are destined to repeat the collapse of our economy and fracture the oppurtunity originally given to everyone to venture a life they are deserving of. What then would the American dream be worth?

inthebox · Jan 20, 2009, 12:20 PM

Congress' Financial Mess by Walter Williams -- Capitalism Magazine

Quote:

One-third of the $15 trillion of mortgages in existence in 2008 are owned, or securitized by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the Federal Housing and the Veterans Administration. Wall Street buyers of repackaged loans didn't mind buying risky paper because they assumed that they would be guaranteed by the federal government: read bailout from the taxpayers. Today's housing mess can be laid directly at the feet of Congress and the White House.

Ask yourself: where has the first 350 billion in TARP gone? What good has it done?

G&P

TexasParent · Jan 20, 2009, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by follow please

ALSO! Would anyone care to share their thoughts on this: Consider the economic crisis the world is in right now, I live in Canada and this is what I'm witnessing. I see people losing jobs, not able to pay rent, no groceries. I'm sitting here thinking, everyone's turing to the government for bailouts, loans, and just plain help, and realizing that it could have a domino effect. Once the people become so dependant on the government, they begin to set stricter regulations, they jack taxes, enforce tighter laws, and aggressive law enforcement. They have to lock us into a narrower path, and this government is starting to remind me of Socialism of the milder type. But like what was stated earlier, man is not perfect, the one in charge can take the power and run with it.

When the free market fails; government steps in. When the free market fails and it affects the nation as a whole; government steps in. If the government didn't step in to rescue the banking system, then more people would be out of work, more retirement and other savings would be lost, pensions, etc. It's not socialist, it's the last resort.

The true test of the governments leanings will be when the banking system recovers. Right now it's unfair to label the government anything other than people trying to do what is best for the people of our countries in the face of this finanical crisis.

follow please · Jan 20, 2009, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexasParent

When the free market fails; government steps in. When the free market fails and it affects the nation as a whole; government steps in. If the government didn't step in to rescue the banking system, then more people would be out of work, more retirement and other savings would be lost, pensions, etc. It's not socialist, it's the last resort.

The true test of the governments leanings will be when the banking system recovers. Right now it's unfair to label the government anything other than people trying to do what is best for the people of our countries in the face of this finanical crisis.

Sorry, I haven't yet labeled the government anything. I'm simply suggesting a course this crisis could run, and see if others agree with my fear.

inthebox · Jan 20, 2009, 12:31 PM

Lets look at why we have this housing bubble that is at the root of this recession;

CRA and the likes of the past administration and the Dems like Frank and Dodds that were supppose to keeping an eye out for us.

Nice job by the politicians.

And it isn't the government that bails us out, it is the taxpayor that pays for these bailouts
.

Bush had it right the first time when the dotcom buble burst - lower taxes. Let the people and the businesses that produce things keep more of their hard earned money.

Bush screwed up this past 6 months, thinking that government and paulson, by spending more money, is going to get us out of this mess. Now Obama thinks government is the answer!

G&P

450donn · Jan 20, 2009, 12:37 PM

See, I see it a totally different way. Government has been unable to fix anything, EVER! So what makes a person believe that they can step in now and fix the mess that they created?
This whole mess was started back in about 1977 with the infamous jimmy carter, and his belief that everybody should own a house. It was further perpetrated in about 1998 with that foolish man in the oval office that took that doctrine and pushed it even further by threatening banks that failed to offer loans to people that had no hope of ever paying off the loans. Freddy and fannie are government run businesses that were/are overseen by congress. So who failed to do the oversight? Government again. So again what makes anyone believe that the biggest crooks the world has ever seen will do a good job of this mess?

Have you ever considered why we choose our systems of government?

Add your answer here.

Check out some similar questions!