“Government should not tell you what to do unless there’s a compelling public purpose,” Mayor Bloomberg said, as he’s too short for irony to find him. And he said this in support of gay marriage, in which you’re asking the government to do something so it doesn’t even really make sense. Obviously, the lead nanny-state proponent is probably one of the worst authorities on when to apply the government, but it’s a question worth asking that I don’t think enough people have contemplated an answer to.
To make things easier, I have come up with my own method for determining when to use the government. First, when contemplating whether to use the government, one must ask himself these three questions about the problem he’s trying to solve:
Will lots of people die?
And they will die not because of their own decisions?
Have you exhausted all non-government options?
If the answer is “No” to any of these questions, then we don’t even contemplate using the government. If the answer is “Yes” to all three, then we think about using the government. First, we have to check if it’s Constitutional and in the budget. And if I were president, I still probably wouldn’t use the government because I’m lazy and don’t want to have to write up a bill, plus I’m all like, “Come on, dudes; solve your own problems. I’m playing Zelda.” Man, we need more lazy presidents.
So how do you determine when it’s appropriate to use the government to solve a problem? Best answer wins… HIGH PRAISE!
When is always and I know a what that’s been ignored. We obviously need a large government agency staffed with many lifers who lack private sector or basic human experience, with an unelected un-accountable agency overseeing them to regulate and control the use of the “slow clap” in TV and movies.
thats my joke for the day
We definitely need the TSA otherwise who could we depend on to check out what kind of s**t ninety-five year old grannies are carrying around in their diapers.
I’m stumped, Frank. The only thing the government is good for these days is forcing the sh!t into the fan.
We use the government to eliminate most of itself, fire most of itself (Without compensation! Yeah!) and salt most of the earth where its wretched buildings once stood.
Finally, and this is important, we use the government to remove itself totally from education so that American kids will grow up into proper American adults.
First, I flip a coin
then I punch my self real hard in the nads – if it doesnt hurt when I do that, then I use the Government
When and only when the civil society cannot (not will not or has not) take(n) care of it.
Maybe I could use the government to beat the Shadow Temple for me. I’ve never lost to a boss in OoT before, so when Bongo Bongo gave my buddy Link there a colonic irrigation (after two fairies) and then ended up at the start of this super-annoying place (I’d say it’s actually worse than the water temple), with three hearts, no fairies, and no arrows, I kinda raged a little.
Also, the government should make Navi not tell me to go to bed every 15 minutes.
I don’t have any reason to believe my vote counts, but Bantha_Fodder should certainly be in the running for High Praise. Though the technique is a bit sexist. We’ll need an alternative method for the women.
Question 1: Can my family help?
Question 2: If not, can my extended family help?
Question 3: If not, can my church help?
Question 4: If not, can my friends help?
Question 5: If not, can random passers-by on the street help?
Question 6: If not, can a pack of feral cats help?
Question 7: If not, can the collective population of inmates of the nearest prison help?
Question 8: If not, can 250 people called at random from the local phone directory help?
Question 9: If not, is suicide an option?
Question 10: If not, is there one single living person employed by or representing a government agency who has not had their head popped off their neck like a champagne cork?
If not, then it is appropriate to use government to solve a problem.
A student gave me an excellent answer when I asked, “What is the purpose of government?” He said, “To keep the ruckus down.”
So, when two guys I don’t know start a ruckus out on my front lawn, and threatening them with my M-1 battle rifle doesn’t scare them away, then I call the government to come haul them off. (While waiting I keep them covered but hide — I stick little twigs in the netting on my helmet and I’m invisible!)
In all other non-ruckus situations things seem to solve themselves, mostly, sometimes.
Well, since most of the Government doesn’t really do anything these days, I think we’re to the point of ridiculousness enough that they should send someone to our house’s each day just to tie our shoes since we are incapable of doing that sort of thing ourselves now.
If head must be pulled from ass, then the government should not be involved, EVER! This pretty much takes them out of everything important with the exception of Military action and normally we leave that to the President but we currently don’t have one who has head pulled from ass so we are like scroooooooed big time if something goes amiss with evil doers!
Since I don’t ever win High Praise because you don’t like me or because you are racist (I’m a white old guy with a job and all), can you also add Low Praise! Like I think I might have a shot at that!!!
1. Are we being attacked? (Y/N)
The government should not be used to tell you what to do, except to stop others from telling you what to do.
Conservatarian,
This was the question I answered, “So how do you determine when it’s appropriate to use the government to solve a problem?”
In which case the answer would be specific to the posting party. I am male so the response would most likely be of the male persuasion, or sexist if you prefer. Maybe I should have put a disclaimer that this method may not yield same results for women. 🙂
@zzyzx- The TSA could easily be eliminated by requiring all passengers over the age of 14 to carry a small caliber handgun.
Bantha_Fodder,
I’ve never been very good at following instructions. Perhaps you should have the government dispense appropriate punishment? On second thought, I don’t want to be responsible for you performing your test to see if government intervention is appropriate. My previous post is hereby withdrawn.
Um, Frank? Didn’t Obama already delegate Healthcare to Pelosi/Reid. “Guys, I’m busy at the golf course, you guys deal with it.” Lazy Presidents is not always optimal.
If the only solution to the problem is to nuke the moon, or a considerable acreage of the Earth, it’s probably best to use the government. Also, giant killer robots. Not everyone should be allowed to build giant killer robots, George Soros and Oprah come to mind.
1. Will it result in an unnecessary revival of Tina Fey’s career?
2. Will it result in the exposure of Rachel Maddow to saturated trans-fats? (oops, too late)
3. Does it involve a plot to replace Earth’s atmosphere with a Helium-Methane and Alka Seltzer compound?
4. Will it make Keith Olbermann relevant again?
One more: Will it cause our national motto to be changed to “ubi est bubula”?
Liberal Answer:
1. Yes.
Loser pays. If you come up with a hair brain idea that is going to cost the taxpayer like a trillion dollars a year and congress votes NO, you owe the government 1 trillion dollars! Pay up now or go to jail, no second chances or parole or any nonsense!
I think Bantha’s got it, but I might add this clause:
…except in times of war. Then I punch a liberal in the nads, and if it hurts, I use the military.
Burma, that wont work – liberals lack the nads – how bout – in time of war, puncha hippie, does it make you feel good? then use military
I guess that is my initial method’s prood of concept, once you lack the nads to feel the pain of a decent punch, then you would resort to government use – liberals always lack the nads, so their first step is government use.
proof of concept, i dont even know what a prood of concept is… hehe
You know, people always talk about the founders like they were super smart but if they really were so smart, they’d’ve made a list, just like Frank’s, listing what the federal government can do and for everything else said, “you know what? uh uh.” Stupid framers.
I think Frank should win this one, but I second the motion for low praise for ussjimmycarter. All those in favor?
Yeah, but how LOW should that Praise go, Fly? There’s a level below which the Praise becomes a real bugger. And ussjimmycarter doesn’t like being buggered! He is, after all, the Secretary of No Buggering!
The libertarian bumper sticker used to be”
“dont steal the government hates competition”
The new bumper sticker of everyone center left-right:
“don’t molest children, old ladies or max our your credit cards, the government hates competition”
If it’s a foreigner who needs killing, the government (in the form of the military) should be called to do the job. otherwise…
I herewith submit for ratification that LOW PRAISE be that which is no higher than one’s knees, EH PRAISE no lower than one’s waist, and HIGH PRAISE no lower than a woman’s uvula (or a man’s, depending upon orientation).
This should appease the anti-buggering lobbyists and at the same time save all those poor souls who would otherwise have been unwillingly (#2) buggered to death (#1) if not for the protection of this law (#3). By happy coincidence, it also meets Frank’s criteria for government action.
He’s cut-off at the knees then! That’s really low, Fly.
Poor ussjimmycarter.
Yes, he’ll have to lose the shins. But I am willing to make that sacrifice in order to give him the low praise he so richly deserves. Are you? I didn’t think so. You see, this is why we need government; to make the hard decisions.
> how do you determine when it’s appropriate to use the government to solve a problem?
I don’t. It’s never appropriate to use the government to solve a problem.
Exception: What Rick said.
> How do you determine when it’s appropriate to use the government to solve a problem?
Sometimes, I have to fasten some objects to each other, where nails or glue are impractical, but there are already threaded holes drilled in the objects.
Government would be great for making sure they’re thoroughly screwed.
No, Fly, I’m not opposed to granting ussjc the Low Praise he so richly deserves. After all, he already has High Praise as the originator of the “head rippin’ & stuffin'” schtick around here. I think we should pass this on to Frank, however. The only problem is I don’t think Frank reads the comments any more.
If its an osama type government its already too late. If its a more reasonable setup and we need to call a screeching halt to terrorist/illegal alien and/or get the economy going then yea
How about “when the Constitution provides for it”?
Just a thought
Shiggz #31 – I’m totally stealing it.
Oh and the answer: trick question – the government doesn’t need to step in to solve problems… unless the problem is, “Gee we don’t seem to have enough waste around us. How can we create more?”
If there are typos here, I apologize; I hve my contacts out and I can’t see anything streaight. My 14 month old broke my glasses. All I see are blurs.
You guys are mean! I like it that way! Mean and nasty! The mean and nasty way. The hard way. The hard, mean and nasty way!!!
The hardest, meanest and nastiest on the innerwebbings!
When it’s time to unfix our fixens and fix what ain’t broke
Make it a crime to think about words we ain’t spoke
When and what things shall stick in our craw
Which criminals connive to make our laws
Who should be jailed for breaking oaths sworn
How some of exist if we are allowed to be born
Once upon a time the US Constitution was a powerful bulwark against usurpers, Turtle, but nowadays politicians drive big yellow buses through it.
I think Frank is looking to maximize the pithiness of the enumerated powers in the hopes that it might better withstand the onslaught of a couple centuries of hubris, even if that means erring on the side of anarchy for funny’s sake.
Because maybe if the Constitution were funny, people wouldn’t be so quick to change it and make it less funny.
1. Has this problem existed since the dawn of mankind?
2. Were people living in mud-huts able to deal with this problem without government?
You must answer no to one or the other before getting government. If you answer ‘no’ to both, you’re clearly a liberal and need to be punched in the face
When the situation is SO AWFUL that even the dumbest congressperson or most power-mad president can’t make it worse …. then you call in Government. Otherwise, probably not.