In the US, government funded research accounts for about a third of US patents. If R&D were solely done by private companies, the US would currently be a second tier economy.
May not be paradise, but the current quality of life in the Western World is probably higher for the average person than at any other time in human history.
But we in The West are running out of steam and I don’t see any government fixing it despite their size. This is an interesting paper on The West. It is well written and the writer is a bit more optimistic about The West than I am:
I heard about a guy who got fired for discarding imperfect bananas, he threw away all the bent ones.
The Captain
You are not running a major US corporation. The early R&D (and in the case of military goods all R&D, plus all space initiatives) is often government sponsored. You are not running a major US corporation. The roads up to the door are often government paid. You are obviously not running a major US corporation. The good ideas are often government sponsored in their infancy. You are obviously not knowledge about government accounting practices. Government budgets are sent through cost/benefit analysis.
What is anything else? I will tackle that as well. LOL
Send me what you are figuratively calling toilet paper.
I asked that question over a range of boards. No response. The rich could easily afford to buy whatever they wanted–including a country. The real reason they do NOT (and never will) have their very own Conservatania is very simple. They can’t afford it–and they know it.
Seriously, dude? You wrote it just a few posts above, then quoted yourself again moments before replying to me. But let’s point it out very clearly.
I bolded it to help you. Maybe I should use an ellipses.
I’m not sure how else to interpret what you said there. Twice.
If you don’t look to government for anything, go somewhere without a government. It’s readily available. Right in Somalia. Probably a few other places around the world, too. Paradise for those who don’t want government getting their noses in your business.
–Peter
My theory is that they really DO want a functioning government. But they want it to function to the benefit of them and their friends, not to benefit those they don’t like.
Look at simple things. If your neighbor takes your stuff, you want to government to intervene - to punish your neighbor for taking your stuff. They like the safety and security of a functioning government.
If your neighbor is building a house, they want the government to inspect it to make sure it won’t catch fire and burn down THEIR house. But if THEY are building a house, they don’t want the government poking around their construction site and telling them how to build it.
–Peter
Which is why having their own country should be VERY APPEALING to them. So why do they NOT have their own country? That would be the most macro thing they could for themselves–or so they claim.
I’m looking at it from an individual standpoint, not necessarily from the standpoint of a group of like-minded people.
Specifically here, we have someone who seems to be unhappy with all forms of government. So I suggest he move to a county with little to no government. He can do that now, with little cooperation from anyone else.
Getting together with others and creating a country from scratch is a lot of work. Just ask George (both of 'em) and Ben and a couple of Jameses and many others, along with the myriad unnamed fighters willing to die for a cause. No, these folk aren’t into hard work. And then they have to come up with some form of government, lest everything fall into anarchy.
No. They just want to take their marbles and go off into seclusion somewhere where no one will bother them with hard questions and deep thinking. Much easier to parrot out platitudes and let others think for them.
–Peter
“Bottled water can prevent dehydration” - not allowed, and the left wing Guardian agrees:
The EU has not said that water isn’t healthy, and it’s ruling on the vexatious claim that bottled water can prevent dehydration is perfectly sensible
But then its not a rule, just advice:
The advice, tens of thousands of words:
Don’t you just love government advice. I don’t know how the human race managed to get where it is without all the government advice we now get 
t comes after the organisation was mocked last month a ruling that led to a ban on claims that drinking water can prevent dehydration.
Despite a long held belief that prunes, traditionally served with custard, are good for improving bowel function, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has ruled this is not the case.
Sir Graham Watson MEP has now challenged an EU Commissioner to a prune-eating contest after his food safety committee ruled that prunes do not have a laxative effect.
Last month, the EU concluded there was no evidence to prove drinking water can prevent dehydration. The conclusions led to a ban on bottled water companies using the claim.
At the time, Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said: “This is stupidity writ large.
“The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are: highly-paid, highly-pensioned officials worrying about the obvious qualities of water and trying to deny us the right to say what is patently true.
“If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project then this is it.”
Prunes are not a laxative, EU rules - Telegraph
Click to expand…
The advice/regulations:
A great read, Shouldn’t take more than a week to plough through it. Shouldn’t we be grateful to big government? How did we manage without it?
Somalia is still calling you. No “big government” there to produce silly regulations. Have you bought your plane tickets yet?
—Peter
Do you honestly think government never did anything useful? Do you think that companies would have stopped polluting the air and water without regulations from departments like the EPA? How about not employing children? (oh wait, an anti-woke political party here is trying to do that again…). How about safer work environments for workers? The list goes on.
Yes, government sometimes does stupid things. Or worse. So do private companies.
Humans weren’t able to manage very well or get any traction at all until they invented “government.” i.e. the institution that allowed them to do more and better together than they could do themselves
Off coure not, but there is a limit to everything. This thread is about Brexit and perhaps its mainly US contributers can now see why we voted for it. For some reason many here are critical of Brexit, but have never lived under EU dictate.
How about a toy safety directive, only 14 pages:
Generally governments do not produce anything, just consume resources and direct these from the productive sectors of the economy. Currently both the USA and UK’s government spending is far higher than Communist China’s. Not good IMHO.
One thing is for sure. Had the EU been in charge in 1620 the Pilgrim Fathers would never been allowed to set sail:
“This wasn’t a huge historic voyage in 1620. If anything, it was an act of madness because they were going at the wrong time of year into an incredibly dangerous Atlantic,” said the exhibition’s curator, Jo Loosemore.
They would still be filling out the paperwork
Aah, the powerful we illusion.
Now, if you recall, your proud boast that you were one of those Brexiteers who voted for was in response to my pondering what those who couldn’t be arsed to vote at all were thinking the next day. The implication being that the Brexit vote was just about as positive an affirmation of a nation’s desire to leave the EU as the results of the 2016 US presidential election were in the outcome.
I have a shrewd idea that, had the opportunity for a do-over existed a few days later, the results of both would’ve been dramatically different.
You could say the same about any vote.
But that’s not how democracy works, assuming that we are living in a democracy that is.
A large part of the UK establishment and quite a few MP’s are doing everything possible to keep us tie to the EU’s apron strings.
That just hogwash.
Of course, governments don’t produce goods. That’s for the private sector to do.
What government does is produce order. Without government, there is anarchy. With anarchy, no one will produce anything they can’t consume fairly promptly.
Government creates the environment where the private sector can be more productive. The cost of government is far less than the increase in production it provides.
Do governments do silly things, too? Yep. But so do private companies. If all you do is look at the silly things, neither look very good.
–Peter
PS - Somalia has no toy safety directives. You might be happier there.
PPS - I actually think that toy safety directives are a good idea. I want the toys my children and grandchildren (If I every get any!!) to be safe. And you can bet your sweet bippie (sorry Divi - that’s a deep dive into US culture you probably won’t get) that business would only give lip service to toy safety if government didn’t impose safety standards.
I’m not suggesting ‘no government’ as I’m sure that you are aware. Big government sucks up resources that the shrinking private sector needs.
Governments should be able to produce order without consuming almost 50% of that country’s GDP.
if you like the idea of a nanny state then that’s fine. There is nothing wrong with that view but just be aware of the cost involved. You’ll love this:
Up to two years in jail if you say it!
Most Americans react like this:
Are you suggesting that reports such as this one (from 2011) and utterances from Rush Limbaugh are what fueled the Brexit vote? It does explain a lot