Eliminate the States...
Note: I'm just thinking this through and presenting plausable arguments, even if I'm not completely moved by them. Let's have the discussion to see what works and what doesn't.
Some of us really like the Tenth Amendment. We think the bloated, intrusive, bureaucratically-crippled federal government needs to be put back in its box, the box compacted, and then sealed in lead. I'm usually one of them, but I'm reevaluating my stance for now.
Here's my basic hypothesis: If we must have government, then we should have an energetic one. At least the federal government can do things. Granted, it's a loaded gun with a hair trigger, so it's very dangerous, but there is no way to uncock it. If we have such a dangerous thing lying around, then we (the right) should accept its reality and do everything we can to be in control of it. Allowing the left to get their hands on it guarantees it will go off and that it will do a lot of damage. If it can't be eliminated, the best we can hope for is some control over it.
Secondarily, why bother with pushing power back down? Local government is no less dangerous than federal, and there are simply more of them. Corruption is just as plentiful at the state and local level as it is at the federal level. I think the City of Bell, California, and quite a few of the states prove this point. We've all seen it at the local level if we've paid attention. Anyone who has ever tried to get a city or county permit to do anything with his own property understands this.
So, if government is inherently dangerous and corrupt, why not just have one that can really do things, but have us as the ones controlling it? The only other option is some form of codified libertarianism, but human nature thwarts any attempt to put such a system in place. As soon as we turn people loose they turn on each other, and the need for some form of efficacious government arises. Is it possible that only one government could be the path to the smallest and most effective form of government overall?
- Comment (67)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Mar '11
Re: Eliminate the States...
So why is LAUSD still so horrible if it has excellent examples all around it?
The problem is still mobility: instead of fixing the problem at home, people in LA who can afford it simply move to Pasadena or OC, leaving the less powerful behind to fight (and lose) against the entrenched interests.
Perhaps this is the least-bad way to improve things, but it does tend to leave the least well-off holding the bag.
Jul '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn:
So, if government is inherently dangerous and corrupt, why not just have one that can really do things, but have us as the ones controlling it?
Why would you think this is a likely -let alone certain- outcome?
Dec '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
BrentB67
Any time men are entrusted with power, be it law enforcement, taxation, etc., over their neighbors the door is open for abuse irrespective of the level at which it happens.
The closer that power remains to a smaller group i.e. state/local vs. federal the more accountability there will be, especially in fiscal matters.
Perhaps you missed my example of Bell, Ca. That place got way out of control and it took outside interference (L.A. Times) to get things started on the right direction.
In my county I've seen a property sit empty for years because the county council did not like the owner. All his development attempts were thwarted. It was developed as soon as he sold the property to someone more to the councilmen's liking. Localization is no panacea for corruption and cronyism.
Dec '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
Palaeologus
The King Prawn:
So, if government is inherently dangerous and corrupt, why not just have one that can really do things, but have us as the ones controlling it?
Why would you think this is a likely -let alone certain- outcome? · 4 minutes ago
It's absolutely not certain, but if the only choice was between us and them controlling it I think it would have a wonderfully clarifying and concentrating effect on our efforts.
Sep '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
So you want plans for the many by the very few?
No thanks
I would rather have 3 dozen more states. Those states would be filled with a like-minded people and of the same moral character.I care not of it's size so long as it meets the minimal standards for statehood.
Centralization leads to bondage. Decentralization leads to freedom.
Jul '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn
Palaeologus
The King Prawn:
So, if government is inherently dangerous and corrupt, why not just have one that can really do things, but have us as the ones controlling it?
Why would you think this is a likely -let alone certain- outcome? · 4 minutes ago
It's absolutely not certain, but if the only choice was between us and them controlling it I think it would have a wonderfully clarifying and concentrating effect on our efforts. · 2 minutes ago
You know, that's interesting, and probably true. Course, they (curse 'em) would also have only one brass ring to chase.
Mar '11
Re: Eliminate the States...
BrentB67
The King Prawn
Residents of states have the liberty of mobility and that restricts a states' ability to tax. Thus it makes it more difficult for states to incur debt because their residents may flee excessive taxation. A state could still incur debt, but will be restricted in amounts and by higher interest rates.
Does this reflect reality though? Much of the debt states are currently facing stems from pensions and healthcare benefits that were agreed to years ago during fatter times, and have not started coming due in huge numbers until recently. Did states who offered overgenerous pensions back in the 80s and 90s face higher interest rates back then?
I'm not challenging you as much as asking - I have no expertise in this area.
Oct '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
Even if supreme executive power was to be entrusted to me for life I don't think it would be the right distribution of authority. There is something to be said for participation in the process of exercising power that builds civic virtue. The more distant that power, the virtue in the community.
May '12
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn
BrentB67
Any time men are entrusted with power, be it law enforcement, taxation, etc., over their neighbors the door is open for abuse irrespective of the level at which it happens.
The closer that power remains to a smaller group i.e. state/local vs. federal the more accountability there will be, especially in fiscal matters.
Perhaps you missed my example of Bell, Ca. That place got way out of control and it took outside interference (L.A. Times) to get things started on the right direction.
In my county I've seen a property sit empty for yearsbecause the county council did not like the owner. All his development attempts were thwarted. It was developed as soon as he sold the property to someone more to the councilmen's liking. Localization is no panacea for corruption and cronyism. · 13 minutes ago
I have yet to see allegations in a county or state that elections weren't being held or that the elections that took place were rigged.
The people of Bell have the government they elected and deserve.
May '12
Re: Eliminate the States...
Mendel
BrentB67
The King Prawn
Residents of states have the liberty of mobility and that restricts a states' ability to tax. Thus it makes it more difficult for states to incur debt because their residents may flee excessive taxation. A state could still incur debt, but will be restricted in amounts and by higher interest rates.
Does this reflect reality though? Much of the debt states are currently facing stems from pensions and healthcare benefits that were agreed to years ago during fatter times, and have not started coming due in huge numbers until recently. Did states who offered overgenerous pensions back in the 80s and 90s face higher interest rates back then?
I'm not challenging you as much as asking - I have no expertise in this area. · 6 minutes ago
You ask a very good and fair question. I do not believe states are being charged interest representative of the risk creditors are accepting. My guess for states getting a break is that there is a perceived federal guarantee of state debt.
We have never seen a state default. I think most investors bet that the federal will backstop states.
Dec '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
Aelreth: So you want plans for the many by the very few?
No thanks
I would rather have 3 dozen more states. Those states would be filled with a like-minded people and of the same moral character.I care not of it's size so long as it meets the minimal standards for statehood.
Centralization leads to bondage. Decentralization leads to freedom. · 12 minutes ago
So we're destined for bondage? We're moving inexorably toward centralization, so why not make of it what we can?
As to more states, heck yes! I'd love to not be associated in any way with the I-5 corridor in Washington, but it's very, very unlikely that any states will be split.
Sep '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
BrentB67
The King Prawn
BrentB67
Any time men are entrusted with power, be it law enforcement, taxation, etc., over their neighbors the door is open for abuse irrespective of the level at which it happens.
The closer that power remains to a smaller group i.e. state/local vs. federal the more accountability there will be, especially in fiscal matters.
Perhaps you missed my example of Bell, Ca. That place got way out of control and it took outside interference (L.A. Times) to get things started on the right direction.
In my county I've seen a property sit empty for yearsbecause the county council did not like the owner. All his development attempts were thwarted. It was developed as soon as he sold the property to someone more to the councilmen's liking. Localization is no panacea for corruption and cronyism. · 13 minutes ago
I have yet to see allegations in a county or state that elections weren't being held or that the elections that took place were rigged.
The people of Bell have the government they elected and deserve. · 0 minutes ago
There was a case in the battle of Athens, TN. It was resolved locally.
May '12
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn
BrentB67
Any time men are entrusted with power, be it law enforcement, taxation, etc., over their neighbors the door is open for abuse irrespective of the level at which it happens.
The closer that power remains to a smaller group i.e. state/local vs. federal the more accountability there will be, especially in fiscal matters.
Perhaps you missed my example of Bell, Ca. That place got way out of control and it took outside interference (L.A. Times) to get things started on the right direction.
In my county I've seen a property sit empty for yearsbecause the county council did not like the owner. All his development attempts were thwarted. It was developed as soon as he sold the property to someone more to the councilmen's liking. Localization is no panacea for corruption and cronyism. · 18 minutes ago
Why do you keep sending these council members back to seats of power? The soil of corruption in any government at any level is disinterested voters. If your coucil isn't satisfactory, run against them or donate/volunteer to candidates that do.
Mar '11
Re: Eliminate the States...
BrentB67
Mendel
BrentB67
The King Prawn
I do not believe states are being charged interest representative of the risk creditors are accepting. My guess for states getting a break is that there is a perceived federal guarantee of state debt.
We have never seen a state default. I think most investors bet that the federal will backstop states.
This is what I suspected as well.
The "50 individual laboratories" may not be a good analogy if the losses from bad decisions are socialized among the other 49.
Sep '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn
Aelreth: So you want plans for the many by the very few?
No thanks
I would rather have 3 dozen more states. Those states would be filled with a like-minded people and of the same moral character.I care not of it's size so long as it meets the minimal standards for statehood.
Centralization leads to bondage. Decentralization leads to freedom. · 12 minutes ago
So we're destined for bondage? We're moving inexorably toward centralization, so why not make of it what we can?
As to more states, heck yes! I'd love to not be associated in any way with the I-5 corridor in Washington, but it's very, very unlikely that any states will be split. · 0 minutes ago
Unfortunately yes, there exists a voice in our hearts that will happily lead us to bondage on the promise of being taken care of. The American experiment represents the one rejection of that premise. Unfortunately, central planners have been diligent in removing that ethos from our youth.
Others have recognized that and we are busy trying to rekindle that.
As to splitting states, West Virginia shows that certain statehood requirements are unnecessary.
Edited on September 21, 2012 at 9:24pmMar '11
Re: Eliminate the States...
Aelreth:
I would rather have 3 dozen more states. Those states would be filled with a like-minded people and of the same moral character.I care not of it's size so long as it meets the minimal standards for statehood.
I think this would be a great solution (although I would also like to see the 17th Amendment repealed and indirect election of presidents brought back). If states are supposed to be laboratories, they need to be allowed to fail - but we already have far too many states which are too big to fail.
What might be most effective is turning metropolitan areas into "city-states." So many bad policies seem to stem from big cities, so why not turn them into their own jurisdictions and take more responsibility for themselves?
Dec '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
BrentB67
Why do you keep sending these council members back to seats of power? The soil of corruption in any government at any level is disinterested voters. If your coucil isn't satisfactory, run against them or donate/volunteer to candidates that do. · 2 minutes ago
I'm outnumbered here. I am donating and working for the prospective replacements, Chris Tibbs and Linda Simpson.
Dec '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
Mendel
The "50 individual laboratories" may not be a good analogy if the losses from bad decisions are socialized among the other 49. · 8 minutes ago
But what if the successes are socialized?
Sep '10
Re: Eliminate the States...
Mendel
I think this would be a great solution (although I would also like to see the 17th Amendment repealed and indirect election of presidents brought back). If states are supposed to be laboratories, they need to be allowed to fail - but we already have far too many states which are too big to fail.
What might be most effective is turning metropolitan areas into "city-states." So many bad policies seem to stem from big cities, so why not turn them into their own jurisdictions and take more responsibility for themselves? · 3 minutes ago
I have suggested suggested that on Ricochet a few times.
I plan on posting an actual conversation on the Memberfeed (much more expansive) provided we win the election.
Statehood requires unfortunately the permission of the state that would be splintered to agree. Along with the municipality in question. Along with a majority vote in the house and senate.
Fortunately West Virginia's Precendent removes that. Bankruptcy of the states aids us.
May '12
Re: Eliminate the States...
The King Prawn
BrentB67
Why do you keep sending these council members back to seats of power? The soil of corruption in any government at any level is disinterested voters. If your coucil isn't satisfactory, run against them or donate/volunteer to candidates that do. · 2 minutes ago
I'm outnumbered here. I am donating and working for the prospective replacements, Chris Tibbs and Linda Simpson. · 7 minutes ago
Nobody ever promised us that freedom and liberty were going to be easy, just that the blood and treasure spilled in pursuit of preserving our God Given Rights would be worth it.
George Washington was outnumbered also.
Keep up the good fight and we will have a King Prawn Monument!