Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave
As I stated before where I grew up most people did not trust the government so part of it is inherited.
Me-thinks you're confusing Government with Ruler-ship. Your ancestors probably came from a part of the world controlled by Rulers (aka Tyrants), and life under the Rulers was so bad that they taught you that "government" is a bad thing.
But for a whole bunch of neuro-sociological scientific facts about human nature that I can get into if you want, we can't operate on any level of organization without some form of "government". Crumb... even organizations as small as two people - i.e. a married couple - have to work out rules over how final decisions for their two-member group's actions are going to be made.
The issue isn't to eliminate government... you can't... not unless you're going to be a perfect monastic hermit (and by "monastic" I mean in its original sense, derived from the Monastic Age, wherein a solitary individual would live away from other humans, subjecting himself to the invisible government of his Deity, which means, even then he hadn't eliminated government; he just replaced it with an imaginary one; monasticism is to government like what kids having imaginary friends is to friendship).
Rather, the issue is to make sure the government you have is one that functions however is the way that's best for the people being governed, and *not* just for the interests of the people doing the governing.
Other than that there is a lot that bureaucrats simply do not need to know. Like my ethnic background, what, if any religion, how many pets. That is irrelevant to running the country.
Huh? That's *exactly* the kind of information governments need to know if they're going to be able to run the country; *especially* in a multicultural society... and by govern, I mean just manage things and maintain peace and order, which is what they're there for.
For example, suppose you've got a neighborhood that's become predominantly Sikh, who have a traditional mid-summer holiday where for one day per year they blow off lots of fireworks, and suppose the community they moved into has a historical ban on fireworks because their yahoo kids could only see fireworks as a fun way to make lots of trouble.
You could *wait* for the Sikhs to do their celebration and start shooting off fireworks, whereupon the surrounding community does a knee-jerk reaction by sending in the cops and triggering a riot, which is almost guaranteed if attacking someone's faith.
Riots are idiotically expensive. In terms of cost, they are not much different than fighting door-to-door combat in a war, regardless of which side predominates, and war is the second-most expensive thing we do.
(American studies say that the only thing more expensive than war is to maintain long-term embargoes. Evidently their own numbers say that it would have been economically cheaper for them to have launched an all-out invasion of Cuba than to have maintained their embargo, but they couldn't get around something that Fidel had on them, plus look at the cost of the Cold War - an embargo on the Soviet Union - it cost eight trillion 1982 US dollars, which was much more than if they'd just flown in with B-52 bombers and nuked the place and then rebuilt New York and LA and Chicago after those had been destroyed with the retaliating Soviet missiles... from the money-boys' point of view, that darned aspect of democracy that keeps putting the value of human life ahead of profits is a real nuisance.. but I digress...)
Anyway, after the riot, it leads to hatred on both sides, which means more expensive policing costs to keep everyone apart, plus it damages the economy, because now the communities are not doing business with each other. Just as it is healthier for assorted nations in a global economy to trade with each other, so also is it healthier to an internal economy for different communities to be doing business with each other, so the national economy is hurt, and it's costing more to maintain the peace.
OR someone at city-hall could have downloaded the latest reports from Stats Canada and said:
"Hey Tony, look at this. The percentage of Sikhs in the south-east has topped 23%, and trend-lines from the previous years show's it's growing at the rate of 4% per year.
"Tell Fred in public works to put enough in his budget for an extra fire-hall in that district, and tell him to make sure there's budget to cover the over-time cost for keeping those extra firemen on alert for the mid-summer Sikh fireworks show. It means fireworks sales are going to go up, so we'll cover the cost of the new fire-hall from the 5% tax on fireworks.
"It also says they're planning to build two new temples. Tell Shiela in Community Relations to find out who the temple leaders are going to be and have her explain to them the painful fines they're going to be hit with if we have to put out any fires started by their little party.
"The stats also say that Chinatown has upped the importation and retailing of fireworks 20% over their own needs, so tell Charlie to tell Chinatown to start adding Hindi to the labeling on the fireworks packaging or we're going to crank the tax on fireworks from 5% to 7%, and while he's at it have him explain how we're going to crank the tax on fireworks past the moon if they import any more of those cheep brands that blow up at the wrong time in order to cover the medical cost of stitching people's hands back on!"
[...] how many pets [...]
Staffer: "Hey Mr. Mayor, the south-central clinic is reporting a very strange jump in the number of people allergic to flea-bites coming in, and we're getting low on the medicine. Plus they're reporting three cases of buboes!"
Mayor: "Hmm, so that means there's a flea infestation down there, which means either there's an explosion in the rat population because nobody's keeping pets, or it means that people are keeping enough pets, but there's a shortage of pet flea-medication. Which is it?"
Staffer: "We don't know. Stats Canada stopped asking people how many pets they have."
Nor do they need to know how many bathrooms anyone has.
Staffer: "Mr. Premier, there's an ongoing outbreak of echoli infections in the east central part of the Island. It's killing the shell-fishery and we're getting low on antibiotics."
Premier: "Oh criminy, are those Lower Slobovian families and their twelve kids per family still doing that thing where instead of adding some plumbing and a new toilette they have their kids crap in the ocean when someone's monopolizing their one bathroom? If so, we can offer a home-owners incentive if they'll just upgrade their plumbing. That will be good for the hardware retailers who can speak Slobovian."
Staffer: "We don't know."
Premier: "Huh? Why not?"
Staffer: "Stats Canada stopped asking people their ethnic origin and how many toilette's they have."
The less information the government has on us the better.
Actually, if you're afraid of a Tyranny, they don't need to know *anything* about you. They just load up some flats with guys holding machine guns, and they drive around shooting anything on two legs. As Napoleon noted, the less the troops know about who they're shooting the better when it comes to using government force against its own people.
I don't trust any government employee not to sell all that info to some marketing firm either.
Penalties for a Stats Canada employee selling information to a marketing firm are the same as they are for a CCRA employee selling information, or using that information for personal gain.
Do you have *any* idea how serious breaches like that are taken, and how stiff the penalties are?
To put it as nicely as I can... Canada has the softest velvet glove on the planet, but if it ever pulls that glove off and starts clenching the titanium fist, you do *not* want to be the target... and violation of CCRA and/or Stats Canada privacy regulations are on that gloves-off level.
Last edited by Omicron; Aug 8th, 2010 at 07:56 PM..