When republicans shout "small government" what does it mean?

As long as you understand.

 

I do not necessary consider myself a small government conservative. I support fiscal responsibility and that may translate to smaller government. I think the rule should be if the private sector can do it more efficiently and effectively the government should get out of the way? However as I pointed out in my previous post the situation is complex and the answer is not for government to get out of everything because as the seat belt law example showed there are other negative impacts on other citizen that are eliminated with a relatively simple regulation.

There was another example with SpaceX. I think overall that is a much better example. It shows the innovation and resourcefulness of the private sector; however, what SpaceX accomplished would not be possible without the decades of work of engineers and scientist at NASA and JPL. This example demonstrates the purpose of government. To lead and innovate when the demand may not even exist. There are countless scientific innovations that resulted from the work done by NASA. Is NASA an example of smaller government? Probably not but in my mind there is no doubt that NASA contributed greatly to the American technological advantage, economy, pride and identity.

BTW Obama drastically cut spending to NASA when he was in office.

Here is an example of why I say small government is a complicated issue. Lets take a topic that has appeared on this forum before. Rural high speed internet. Many rural areas do not have high speed internet coverage. High speed internet has almost become a necessity of modern life. We use it to work, do business, shop, social interaction and more. Should rural communities continue to be deprived of it simply because the revenue earned will not cover the cost for private companies? Should the government get involved to ensure everyone has access to HS internet?

 

The only reason private industry is able to go into space is because of govt exploration in the first place.

 

Yes. No seat belt laws. Will reduce the size of government by 0% and increase the amount of government spending on emergency room visits and disability payments.

Win!

 

Where people decide

 

Exactly

 

So what.

They only reason we invented the car was because the buggy came first so does that mean it's more efficient to go back to the buggy?

Where will you keep your horse?

 

So the problem is not seat belts, its the government's policy of rewarding irresponsibility.

 

The alternative being, what, exactly?

 

In the stable with all the others.

 

When I 'shout' it, I mean more localized govt. I see 'sanctuaries' (both illegal immigration and gun rights) as positive movement in the right direction towards more localized govt.

 

Natural selection!

 

Remove the law that says ERs aren't required to treat patients ? Can you be more specific?

 

No. We are pretty much stuck paying for the responsibility of others. In theory, its your life and you shouldn't expect others to pay, but in reality, I couldn't turn someone in need of life saving medical care away because they didn't wear a seat belt. My dad never wore one. He drove big cars that could absorb impact. I used to ride in the bed of a pick up truck when I was a kid. Times have changed!

 

Most people used to drive not wearing a seat belt. That doesn’t mean it was smart. Does wearing a seat belt really put you out that much? Cars never used to have air bags either, should we get rid of those? I get you don’t care about it but seat belts saves lives. Air bags saves lives. Requiring a fence around pools saves lives. Banning smoking in public places saves lives. That shouldn’t bother you but it seems that it does. That’s a shame.

 

Exactly. Hence the seat belt law. It saves us all money, and inconveniences the wearer by a fraction of a miniscule.

 

Exactly right. Save lives and money. You’d think those would be GOOD things but apparently not to some.

 

Clearly not interested in listening, understanding, and then debating. This is how a 4 year old approaches a disagreement.

 

I can think of a lot of policies that could save lives and money, but unlike some, I don't need government to be my daddy, nor advocate that it acts like others nanny.

 

Then don’t wear your seatbelt. Problem solved. You’re welcome.

 

Government has zero ability to generate wealth. Everything government does relies on extracting private dollars, reducing investment in growth.

Government takes, $100 from business, loses $10 to inefficiencies, $20 to fund itself, and then spends $70 and pretends its helping.

 

Don't legislate it.

That's the issue.

 

Just like masks aren't supposed to stop the virus, the safety laws aren't meant to stop all accidents.

We do the things that are easy to lighten the load and minimize risk.

 

The only person hurt by not wearing a seat belt is the idiot driver. I oppose government protecting people from themselves.