Re: Why Capitalists Want ... less government?

[Robert Probasco <rcprobasco@email.com>]

------Original Message------
From: Ken Medlin <dev-plan@moscow.com>
>[snip] we enjoy most of what we have to a free enterprise system and
competitive business practices, perhaps the envy of the world. Yet, our
'forefathers' had the wisdom to place a share of our landed inheritance in
perpetual trusts, such as the land-grant universities. [snip]

Quite so.  Let us not forget our forefathers, both 18th and 19th century
models, considered government to be an entity which should provide only
those elements which individual citizens could not provide for themselves. 
Community problems were solved in the community, without heavy-handed
federal intervention.

The D.C. revolutions of the 1930s (New Deal) and the 1960s (Great Society)
gave impetus to the idea that anything worth doing should have federal
taxpayer support.  Many of their objectives were necessary and worthwhile,
but an ugly legacy of "let the government do it" has pervaded our culture.

Now we witness the backlash of excessive government intervention. 
Worthwhile programs (school bonds, road repair) are being defeated because
so many foolish proposals have been funded.

Are we surprised at this?

> Healthy economic development depends equally on good and fair
> social legislation that benefits not just one sector of society > but all
participants.

Well said.  So, how elastic is our definition of "all participants"?

Robert Probasco        rcprobasco@email.com

-----------------------------------------------
FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com
Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com