|
I mean..they don't trust the government...I mean...
Well which one is it?
They don't trust the government to handle the education of your children. They want to dismantle the department of education, and some have openly talked about privatizing the whole system, as a next step past school vouchers...
They don't trust the government to handle healthcare. They think they'd make a mess of it, that there'd be waiting lines, and all of a sudden, if we put the U.S. government in charge, we'd have the worst health care in the world...
They don't trust the government to handle welfare programs. They think things would be better off if it were all privatized and charity for the poor done through churches and other private organizations.
They don't trust the government to run our prisons and favor privitizing prisons.
They don't trust the government to do pretty much anything. The whole mentality is that the private sector can do it better and cheaper and with less corruption. Their argument is that government, particularly centralized government is always corrupt and worse than decentralized or privatized functions.
I disagree with that, at least on some issues....I do think privitization occasionally makes more sense, and sometimes centralizing things is better...
However, how do they jive that with trusting the government to have the authority to wield wiretaps without warrant (now overthrown) or to hold people indefinately without trial, all on the argument that the government would never abuse that authority...it's meant for terrorists...
I just don't get how they jive that in their heads. It's not consistent. Or is it? Can someone explain how you can not trust government to handle a million different things because of inefficiency and corruption, yet trust them with nearly limitless security powers including indefinate detention without trial based on 'their word'?
|