This has been debunked through the experiment that is human civilization. It's not a question whether government is necessary, it's a question of how much the government should handle and how it should function. Instead of addressing this question with real answers like healthcare, education, roads, internet you instead make the claim that government is inherently bad. That's about as strong a factual statement as the sky is red and the Earth is flat. Having a government is not up for discussion, if you're still having that discussion you just aren't sitting at the big boy table..
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
cool...rather that discuss ideas you make a personal attack.
what were you saying about the big boy table?
reading comprehension is a thing.
If you had some you might have noticed that I implied LESS...not none.
by the way...roads are over rated.
hyperloop- autonomous air taxis..tele-presence... virtual reality....that kind of thing.
etc..etc..etc...
Except no where in my comment did I launch a personal attack, and I didn't mischaracterize your argument because you ARE saying that fundamentally the question is less government or more. That's not true, the question is resources and power. Even if we have these technologies you're talking about, the question is still are they more efficient as public or private entities? For transportation it's clear public utility is far more functional, and government having power over transport is not a threat to ordinary people, whereas government having power over spying on our private information is absolutely a threat.