You think NO government will fix it? Then move to Somalia!
Government is an evil necessity. Without government we can't have a state.
You want an honest, transparent government that is (relatively) efficent and gives good value. It happens that smaller governments are easier to oversee.
If there is anything that the last decade has shown us, it is that corporate governance isn't any better, and it is a whole lot less accountable. Do you think it is a better idea to replacing publicly elected and publicly funded government with giant private corporations? I don't.
And again we are back to "fix the government" or "Move to Somalia"
No government would be better. Somalia has dozens of governments, that's actually the problem. Africa is actually well known for having almost nothing but highly centralized, leftist, factional, governments.
No government, and mechanisms that prevent them from forming are not the same as multiple governments vying for control over a region with unlimited political violence at their disposal.
You'll never get down to no government, but it's best to limit it as strictly as possible.
Which is farther than anything OP said because you made a ridiculous false dichotomy.
You're a statist liar or an NPC generating anti-libertarian strawmen. Do you know anything about what actual limited government advocates believe? GiveThemNothing never implied Chicago needed "NO GOVERNMENT", Gizortnik never suggested Chicago should be run by corporations. (how the fuck are corporations an alternative to government when they require government to exist?) That came from your demented mind.
Yes, more government will fix it.
Keep voting blue.
You think NO government will fix it? Then move to Somalia!
Government is an evil necessity. Without government we can't have a state.
You want an honest, transparent government that is (relatively) efficent and gives good value. It happens that smaller governments are easier to oversee.
If there is anything that the last decade has shown us, it is that corporate governance isn't any better, and it is a whole lot less accountable. Do you think it is a better idea to replacing publicly elected and publicly funded government with giant private corporations? I don't.
And again we are back to "fix the government" or "Move to Somalia"
Don't be dense, Panda. I said more government, not no government.
Also, something something "giant private corporations", inane babble "Somalia", where the fuck are you getting that from?
What kind of fucked up bamboo shoots are they feeding you at the zoo?
No government would be better. Somalia has dozens of governments, that's actually the problem. Africa is actually well known for having almost nothing but highly centralized, leftist, factional, governments.
No government, and mechanisms that prevent them from forming are not the same as multiple governments vying for control over a region with unlimited political violence at their disposal.
You'll never get down to no government, but it's best to limit it as strictly as possible.
Which is farther than anything OP said because you made a ridiculous false dichotomy.
So we can't have No Government. You agree with me!
One of the alternatives to Government is privatization, which would be corporations. That is very popular in China. You don't agree?
Do you realize you basically restated my reply?
No. Privatization is not the establishment of legal fictions
You're a statist liar or an NPC generating anti-libertarian strawmen. Do you know anything about what actual limited government advocates believe? GiveThemNothing never implied Chicago needed "NO GOVERNMENT", Gizortnik never suggested Chicago should be run by corporations. (how the fuck are corporations an alternative to government when they require government to exist?) That came from your demented mind.
I'm surprised you didn't invoke "muh roads".