So no Government means no Public schools, no Social security, no roads, no medicare, No Military, no air traffic control. I guess we could all go back to living in Caves and then we would not have to worry about Government.

@dermot235 There would be none of those public options, but that doesn't mean the demand for such services wouldn't be met. Thinking otherwise is like being in 1855 and thinking society will end if we get rid of slavery. "Who will build the roads?" = "Who will pick the cotton?"

Or perhaps a better comparison is Soviets in a bread line saying "in America the government doesn't even give the people bread!"

So the Private sector would meet the demand for free Primary and High school education and Social security would be paid for by corporations. And we would let the private sector run our military. And the markets would sort out health care for the elderly (Medicare). If you want to see what a country looks like without a government then look a Somalia. Is Somalia your idea of a success story?

@dermot235 There's no such thing as a free lunch. Charter schools already spend less money per student and with better results than their "free" counterparts. We'd be better off letting people pay less in property taxes/rent and use that money to find the best option for their children.

Social security is a combination of unemployment insurance and a retirement plan. What about those does not sound like the private sector could handle it? Heck, it already has to supplement it because the government is so bad at meeting consumer demand. And at least then people only might be the victim of a Ponzi scheme rather than being forced to fund it.

The military is the cause of most terrorism at this point.

Health care was far cheaper before government stepped in. People were more worried about a missed paycheck than the price of visiting a doctor. Heck, consider Lasik. I've seen ads for less than $300 per eye. That's not even a week's pay each at my retail job. That's what healthcare without significant government intervention is like.

Lol, really? You're still using the tired old Somalia argument? Why don't you "prove" God's existence with the ontological argument while you're at it? Here's a whole video about Somalia for you:

OK lets start making REAL comparisons about Big Government V small Government.
EDUCATION: Countries where the state controls education have more success with educating their population then countries that leave it to the private sector. Take my country, Ireland. Central government funds education for FREE up to second level and 50% of students (30% in the US) go on to third level education (Universities and College. The cost is about 4000 dollars a year and if you are from a family with an income of below 50,000 your college is FREE. Literacy levels and performance in the sciences and maths are way better than the US as they are in other countries where the State funds and controls education with the US falling further behind year after year. Countries Like Japan, South Korea, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, France. In fact the US is shamefully behind most wealthy countries in the World when it comes to education and levels of achievement and exam results.

Social security is not suppose to be a profit making enterprise. It's supposed to cost money. People pay taxes and wealth is then transferred to people in old age so they have an income. Taxing people who work and taxing business in order to pay for this is a good thing. The Private sector does not and can not provide this type of safety net for it's workers. And it should not be asked to. It's the Governments job to do this. And we should always remember that social security is not something that is available in a lot of countries around the world. The Private sector does not step in to provide this security. People just work until they die without any retirement income available from anywhere. And Oh BTW, our social security system in Ireland provides very well for our elderly population. It's not a Ponzi scheme. It's a well run government programme that ALL of our citizens are proud of.

You claim that health care is more expensive when the sate steps in. Now this is where you are living in Cloud Cuckoo land. The US spends 19% of GDP on health care. (Medicare being the best example of heath care costs being controlled). In Europe we spend on average about 11% of GDP on health care. And before you start telling me how terrible public health care is, theses are some of the facts. Patient outcomes are better in Europe than in the US. By far. Germany, France Scandinavian countries, Ireland, Austria and so on and so on all have better patient outcomes than the US. And we don't leave 70 million people uninsured and underinsured in out population. Medical cost are the number 1 cause of Bankruptcy applications in the US.

As for Military intervention. I can make this a short One. Yes, unintended consequences, a phrase I heard Ran Paul Use about Military intervention. I agree with him. Sometimes Military intervention is justified or even needed but most of the time it's not and results in unintended consequences. Iraq, and Vietnam being 2 very good or Bad examples of this depending how you phrase it. So we can agree on that.

As for successful countries that all have BIG government compared to the US. There are so many examples of this. Ireland has BIG government. Germany has BIG government. Switzerland has BIG government. Norway has BIG government. Japan has BIG government. And all of theses countries have one thing in common. FREE Public health care systems that cost less than the US private system by a huge amount. Better patient outcomes. FREE third lever or low cost Third level Education. More time of work. Government rules on holidays. (4 to 6 weeks off per year by LAW). And Higher per capita income that the US. Yes Wages in these countries are higher than the US.

@dermot235 "government funds education for FREE up to second level" same in the US. However, there are options here. Charter schools (privately operated) spend less money per student but with better results. Private schools generally get even better results. It's clear that the public option is the worst option.

BTW, do you have a source for that claim that only 30% go to college in the US? The most recent I could find was this (attached) which shows about 2/3 of high school graduates going on to college and the statistics are 20 years out of date. From what I've heard that number has only increased. But the more important point is, America is no more of a free market for education than Ireland. Hence its aggregate statistics can't really prove anything about the system I think is best.

"Social security is not supposed to be a profit making enterprise." Why not? What's wrong with profit?

"People pay taxes and wealth is then transferred to people in old age so they still have an income." And what do we call it when you promise everyone more than they put in but actually only give new people's money to old members? A Ponzi scheme. It's set up such that its debt eternally grows. At some point it becomes unsustainable. "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

"The Private sector does not and can not provide this type of safety net for its workers." But it does. Retirement plans generally give people better returns for old age. Health insurance companies like Aflac offer to cover your paycheck while you can't work due to injury or illness, and that's assuming your company's system doesn't pay (which, if your injury was work related, it probably will).

"It's the government's job to do this." Why? Keep in mind, government only works one way. If you don't do what it says, it sends armed enforcers to make you. So that in mind, how do you justify pointing a gun at someone to make them pay not only for their own grandparents' retirement, but everyone else's too?

"The US spends 19% of GDP on healthcare." Because of government. You don't seem to understand. America has fallen. We are a feudalist system disguised as a capitalist constitutional republic. Giant corporations are the barons that protect medium businesses like call centers. Small businesses just try not to draw enough attention to get crushed. There's a similar parallel system between federal, state, county, and city governments. Our healthcare system was once cheap enough that the doctors came to you and you still worried more about the missed paycheck than the price of treatment, but not since the FDA and Medicare.

I'm glad we at least agree about the military for the most part.

I didn't say the US has smaller government. In fact, it doesn't. Although I think it's funny that you cherry picked. Venezuela also has BIG government. Brazil has BIG government. Cuba has BIG government. Russia has BIG government. North Korea has BIG government. China has BIG government. The older a society is, the bigger its parasitic ruling class is, and the same goes for prosperity that draws predation.

OK. You are not reading what I say. You choosing to ignore most of my points.
So when the US funds it's public service the ways European government do and the services don't perform, then you can complain about how bad government is. In Europe Public services work and people here are proud of them.
And you are now just starting to SPIN things. Private pension funs do not Outperform Social security when it comes to providing income for elder citizens.
Social security should not make a profit for people who are paying into it. They should get all the benefits accrued.
And without going into every county you mentioned. You are again wrong. Sounds like you just made stuff up. Brazil does not have BIG government. It does not collect taxes as a percentage of GDP in any way that resembles what is done in Europe. And you can't be so stupid to believe that the problems of Cuba and Venezuela and Russia and North Korea is because there government is big or small BIG government. It's for other reasons. Communism (Never works) and what European countries do is not communism. We have wealthy successful people who innovate and fuel a vibrant capitalism. Russia is corrupt and has no manufacturing industry or hi-tech services industry to talk about to talk of. Russia relies on digging things out of the ground for it's wealth. Oil, Gold, Diamonds. Countries that totally rely on this for there economy to thrive never succeed economically in the long term. Venezuela has Oil. Switzerland has no natural resources at all and is wealthy. But I guess looking at the facts is not important. If you can Cherry pick countries just like you cherry Pick Cities to make your point, even when you must know they are not good comparisons for why big government can work really well, then you are only interested in choosing things that support your argument and not the FACTS. And the fact is that the most successful countries economically and socially in the world have BIG Government that is the cause of their success. IT WORKS.

College education in Ireland cost a maximum of 3,600 Dollars a year and is Free for low income families for students across our country and not upward of 30,000 dollars PLUS a year for most students in the US (the land of opportunity) and you can't make up your mind as to which is best. SERIOUSLY?

Interesting that you view your government as a parasitic ruling class. So the CDC and the EPA are parasites. Defunding of theses bodies by Trump and the republicans has been extreme in the last 3 years. And look where this has got you. You do have smaller government that other developed nations and then when your government does not work effectively you blame "Big" government. And of course your Public school option if the worst performing school sector. You fund most of it with Local Property Taxes. This leaves poor counties with less funding that wealthy counties. A system like this does not exist in other developed countries. In fact poor areas in most developed countries receive more funding per student than in wealthy areas. Social mobility is something that to a large degree results form a countries ability to give as much equality of opportunity to all of it's citizens. Education being one of the most important parts of this. Education gives everyone a chance to succeed. Ranking highest in social mobility in the world, and holding the number 1 to 4 positions are Denmark, Norway, Finland and Sweden. All of these countries fund their education through exclusively Public school options. And they have BIG government. The US ranks 27. These are just facts. Libertarian ideology does not like these facts. The ideology is more important that the results achieved by a society. Libertarianism has had it's chance. 150 years ago all countries had small government. Government was less than 10% of a countries economic output. And the private sector did not step in to fill needs that were needed. Governments had to get involved to solve theses problems. Even basic needs like electrification. Rural America had an electrification programme in the 1930's. Government did this, not private enterprise. It's not a question of Big or small government. Government needs to be the size it needs to be to get things done. And that is BIGGER than it is is the US. Equality of opportunity, Healthcare, Education, public transport, road infrastructure and the military should be done by government. These are all things that government needs to be involved in and results in better outcomes for it's citizens. Running a restaurant, making cars, computers, building office buildings and so on are things that the private sector does better than any government can and these things need to be left to them. Ideology should play no part in who does what and who runs what. Results and outcomes should determine who does what and how. Government has it's place and the private sector has it's place. Ideology has no place in determining this. Results do.

Education ranking globally
Asian countries dominate the top of the rankings, with Singapore heading the table, followed by Hong Kong in second place and South Korea in third. Ireland ranks 15. The United Kingdom ranks 20th, and the United States comes in at number 28. The more government gets involved in eduction, and properly funds it, the better the ranking. This is a trend that is global and the evidence is there to support this. There are exceptions but the trend is overwhelming.

@dermot235 I have read everything you've written. Given that wall of text and the fact that if anything you presented less evidence and more rhetoric this time around, I don't think I'll bother reading any more. If you don't even care how big government can supposedly just do things other people can't, I'm going to treat it as a claim that there's a god that can do things humans can't. In other words, I'm going to ignore your religion for what it is.

@Janus819 What a shame you have given up. I was enjoying the debate. Just because we disagree does not mean I am not listening to what you have to say. Pity you could not find one thing I said that you could agree with. I did find one thing you said that I agreed with. And I did reference Rand Paul, so I do keep up and listen to what some libertarians say. In fact I find myself agreeing with them on a lot of things. Just not on guns and small government

@Janus819 where did you get this info and what country are you talking about?

"Charter schools (privately operated) spend less money per student but with better results. Private schools generally get even better results. It's clear that the public option is the worst option."

As a founding member and board secretary for a charter school in the US...involved in and interacting with the US educational system through first my own education then that of 5 children...if you meant to say this about charter schools here in the United States, I can tell you that this is a completely false statement. It is propaganda of the worst kind. The metrics are fake!

Charter schools, like private school, pander to the elite - the weathy, the privileged, a narrowly defined intellectually gifted, mostly WHITE elite. Issues of racial equality or parity, equal treatment and opportunity for the handicapped or learning disabled...is not mandated for these institutions...that is why their statistics "look" better than an equivalent public school. They literally throw out students that under perform... if those "types" of students get through the waiting lists and application process in the first place.

Additionally, many of these schools have severely under educated unprofessional teachers who are also grossly under paid but who can't complain or they wouldnt get to be educators at all. Furthermore, during my time building and supporting a charter school... I watched a huge number of these "teachers" get fired for what amounts to child abuse.

It is my understanding that there are a number of lawsuits in many places in the United States that are rightfully arguing that public education money should only be given to schools that uphold public school standards of equality and opportunity for all...there are also a number of lawsuits protesting student abuse which abounds at these charter schools.

Just my opinion, but as I am too busy to research the lawsuit stats... your milage may vary.

The US military is a lot more than just airplanes. Yes, when planes get worn out, they go to a boneyard to be picked over for parts later on, but you can bet they have logged many hours of flight before going there. Trust me, we don't build (not buy) planes just to stick them in a field to rust away. And so you know, the US military employs more people than any company in the world, including any other country's military. You want to cut those jobs as well I suppose? You need to put things in their true perspective, Mare.

@Captain_Feelgood the big problem is that a large portion of military spending is nothing more than more corporate welfare that is used to prop up oil companies and other industrial interests.. it's a backdoor to make pump prices artificially low that cons the lower income people , who actually pay taxes, into subsidizing the large commercial fuel users. Yet another case of the rich taking from the poor.

So Captain_Feelgood believes that the only jobs that can be created are ones created by spending money on the Military. You can spend money on anything and create jobs. Building Schools, Hospitals, infrastructure, anything works. You could reduce Military spending and employ more teachers for example. Mare is 100% correct in my view. And the US Military does not employ more people that anyone else in the World. It's actually the Chinese Military that do that. And the Indian railway company employs ,more that 1,100,000 people. Three times the amount of soldiers in the US army. The Turkish Army has over 1,000,000 solders. Biggest army by numbers in all of NATO.

Does anyone need more than say $30 million? or maybe it should be a multiplier of the people who work for them. does making 20x or 50x the lowest salaried worker make sense?

@Mare Is that $30 mil. in cash or does it include the value of your company? If I have $28 mil. in assets and invent a widget worth $5 mil., and I am offered $5 mil. for it, am I not allowed to get all $5 mil? Does the gov. take the extra $3 mil. ?

If anyone out there has more than 30 Million and they don't need it give me a call. I'll take it off your hands. lol

The people who need it are not necessarily the ones who can pay for it. What do you do about people who are mentally or physically disabled?

@Mare They are assessed and then cared for by the state, or their parents Or partners can get respite/ be caters depending on the situation. Obviously it’s on a case by case assessment.
I guess that’s the main difference of A lot of other Countries, they recognise the need for their Country to have baseline care and income, even if Some of the rich fight for it to be just above the poverty line, the majority of the population don’t resent paying taxes as we know it’s important to support education, healthcare, road and transport infrastructure.
To be honest the only time I resent it is when politicians use the tax payers money to bail out the rich, or pay for themselves to do things that most of us would have to pay for out of our own pocket. But in the scheme of things I’d rather pay tax and help provide health and education etc to people in my country.

Do you despise Bill Gates who is giving 97% of his money away to do good things with. Don't you think despising EVERYONE who is rich is a bit Rich

They don't just think it...they do...

[blog.raulza.me]

@Robecology I should have been more clear - lots of people work very hard for very little so to hell with the rich and 'I've earned every penny'.

@brentan There's only one solution;