Government Involvement Quiz

[Jojo Bags]

Take this quiz regarding how much you feel the government should be involved in the economy, private lives, and the extent of its power.   I'll post the analysis of answers later.

B.

Do you favor -

1. Graduated tax rates on income?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ]

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ]

5. A system of free public education?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

C.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ]

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

5. If you believe in some, but not complete licensing power, indicate three trades, professions, businesses, etc. which should be licensed:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

List three which should not be licensed:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

E.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

5. If you favor a partial, but not complete set of government standards, name three products or services for which standards should be set by government:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

Name three products or services for which standards should not be set:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

F.

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

G.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

[Vort]

Why is there no A?

Quote

B.

Do you favor -

1. Graduated tax rates on income?

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances?

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution?

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses?

5. A system of free public education?

B. 1 N, 2 N, 3 N, 4 Y, 5 Y

Quote

C.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes?

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs?

C. 1 N, 2 Y

Quote

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages?

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

5. If you believe in some, but not complete licensing power, indicate three trades, professions, businesses, etc. which should be licensed:

List three which should not be licensed:

D. 1 Y, 2 N, 3 N, 4 N, 5 {health care providers such as physicians and dentists; skilled labor such as electricians and plumbers; legal professionals such as attorneys} {private tutors; unskilled labor; providers of religious services}

Quote

E.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity.

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.

5. If you favor a partial, but not complete set of government standards, name three products or services for which standards should be set by government:

Name three products or services for which standards should not be set:

E. 1 N, 2 N, 3 Probably N, 4 N, 5 {airplane manufacturing; automobile manufacturing; food processing} {private equipment operation on private land; parenting; authoring}

Quote

F.

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs?

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits?

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights?

F. 1 Y, 2 Y, 3 Probably N, unless provision is made for eminent domain-type claims

Quote

G.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

G. 1 Y, 2 N

Edited March 6, 2016 by Vort

[Guest]

@Jojo Bags,

I have completely libertarian responses to all of the above, except:

3 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

Some, yes.  As minors, they do not have the wisdom/understanding/maturity/responsibility to enter into contracts with other parties on their own.  So, the power to limit activities by children is warranted.  But tremendous care should be exercised so as to not infringe on parental rights.

3 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

D.

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

No, I have no problem with them licensing as long as private organizations can compete fairly with such governing agencies.  Then practitioners may choose which agency/organization to gain a license from.  The public may choose which to depend on.

3 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

G.

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

The scriptures provide accurate guidance, yes.  But guidance cannot be equated to a rulebook as detailed as laws.

[kapikui]

 

B.

Do you favor -

1. Graduated tax rates on income?

I'm not against a graduated tax rate provided that the upper tax rate is capped at 5% or less, an that ALL other forms of taxation are prohibited. I'm not particularly against other forms of taxation, but the government should be limited in how many taxes it can levy

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances?

No.  I am generally against any inheritance tax, however I could be persuaded provided the total percentage was kept to single digits and all or most other taxes were eliminated.

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution?

Fun to think about, but for many reasons too numerous to list here, not realistic.

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses?

The only federal regulation I'm generally for on most businesses is a total truth when making public statements with similar standards to persons under oath in a court of law.  This includes advertising and sales representatives being held personally responsible for knowing lying to customers.  Representatives of the company, who knowingly lie to customers or stock holders, or managers who encourage them to or feed them false information to deceive customers can be held criminally liable. 

5. A system of free public education?

No.

C.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes?

No, but I believe that people advocating for such should receive no police protection should someone consider them to be committing an act of war against the United States. 

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs?

Not by right.  That does not mean that some government aid to the poor isn't necessarily a good idea, but there is no right as such. 

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

To some degree, child labor laws were started because children were chained to machines and made to work 16 hour days. 

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages?

Minimum wage in any form is a terrible idea. 

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?

Government should have very little licensing power. 

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

Not completely without

5. If you believe in some, but not complete licensing power, indicate three trades, professions, businesses, etc. which should be licensed:

a)Doctors

b)Lawyers

c) Critical professions for public safety (pilots?)

List three which should not be licensed:

a)Most everything else

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

E.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

Government should have very little power to regulate any economic activities except for the afore mentioned making them tell the truth. 

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity.

Perhaps a little, but only in extreme circumstances specifically for public safety or health. 

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

Not precise, but there would be only a little grey area. 

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.

There are few if any minimum standards government should set. I haven't thought it out precisely, but the vast majority of this would be handled by the "tell the truth" provision mentioned earlier. 

5. If you favor a partial, but not complete set of government standards, name three products or services for which standards should be set by government:

a) Food?

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

Name three products or services for which standards should not be set:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

F.

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs?

Only in extreme circumstances where failure to do so results in immediate public harm. 

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits?

Only insofar as to assure that public or common goods are not ruined by others.  EG, someone upstream on a river dumping pollutants to be dealt with by those down stream or restricting stream flow. 

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights?

Yes, though I would be OK with states owning some.  The federal government should own none and lease the necessary land from states for a reasonable price, however in cases of national defense, the federal government may need power to compel the use of particular land if that land has critical strategic value. 

G.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.

The line is a bit blurry, not very. 

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

If they did, we'd all agree on what the good and bad laws were. 

[LeSellers]

B.

Do you favor -

1. Graduated tax rates on income?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

Taxation should be equal for all. there should be no income tax (a tax on production) because we need as much production as possible.

Everyone should pay the same tax, e.g., $2,500/year.

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ]

Again, a tax on production: counter productive.

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution?

Yes/Agree [X ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X]

The market will regulate these activities far better and more effectively than any bureaucracy.

5. A system of free public education?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

Parents have the responsibility to educate their children. Taxing others to pay for their duty breaks the VIII and X commandments.

C.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X]

Only if government were able to legitimately equalize all efforts, skills, intelligence, motivations, and a host of other productivity inputs.

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

Their "claim", if, indeed, any exists, is on those who love them. Government is incapable of "love". Churches, families, friends and neighbors can, do, and should.

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

Child labor was and is often the only means for children and their families to survive. Forbidding it is a recipe for eternal poverty.

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

Only if government has the legitimate power to set minimum productivity rates.

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

Government should stay completely out of economics.

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

Yes/Agree [ X] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

If people want goods and services that other people can and are willing to produce, the government should not hinder their getting them freely.

5. If you believe in some, but not complete licensing power, indicate three trades, professions, businesses, etc. which should be licensed:

a) No such activity exists.

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

List three which should not be licensed:

a) Any activity for which people are willing to trade their own efforts.

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

E.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity.

Yes/Agree [X ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ X]

(Yes, I understand irony.)

The line falls between activities no one is willing to provide or exchange for, and those activities anyone is willing to provide or exchange for.

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

People's choices will always dictate the minimum quality of any good or service offered on the market.

5. If you favor a partial, but not complete set of government standards, name three products or services for which standards should be set by government:

a) No such goods or services exist.

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

Name three products or services for which standards should not be set:

a) Any good or service for which others are willing to exchange their own production

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

F.

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

People are wise enough to do this on their own, and better able to determine both the desired outcome and the best means to accomplish it.

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

When we need these resources, individual people can make the best use of them without interference.

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights?

Yes/Agree [X ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

This "ownership" is both immoral and unconstitutional (in 99% of cases). The government should get out of the landlord business.

G.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.

Yes/Agree [X ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

Government should prohibit only those activities where force, coercion, or fraud compel an innocent party into acting against his own will or interests.

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

Yes/Agree [ X] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

Doc&Cov 134 is a good point of departure:

2 We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.

Lehi

Edited March 6, 2016 by LeSellers
Add reference

[Traveler]

Just wondering - would it change anyone's responses if the government we are considering was the government and laws by which the Celestial Kingdom (note the term "Kingdom") is governed?

 

The Traveler

[Vort]

21 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Just wondering - would it change anyone's responses if the government we are considering was the government and laws by which the Celestial Kingdom (note the term "Kingdom") is governed?

Celestial law is completely different from the laws of man that we are talking about. Celestial law is always by voluntary covenant, made by those who have proven themselves honest and upright in all things. The two situations sound similar, but in reality are so fundamentally different that they really are not comparable.

[Traveler]

27 minutes ago, Vort said:

Celestial law is completely different from the laws of man that we are talking about. Celestial law is always by voluntary covenant, made by those who have proven themselves honest and upright in all things. The two situations sound similar, but in reality are so fundamentally different that they really are not comparable.

Are you saying our laws and governments here on earth should not reflect in any way what we understand of G-d and his laws?

[Backroads]

Do you favor -

1. Graduated tax rates on income?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ]

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [X ]

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ]

5. A system of free public education?

Yes/Agree [X ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

However, I'd prefer a scenario where, society as government, merely checks to see that education is not being denied to younger children. Form: Is your child receiving an education? Check yes or no.

C.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ]

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs?

Yes/Agree [x ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

Theoretically, yes. I'm not entirely opposed to a government welfare system, but I don't think how it currently exists.

 

D.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor?

Yes/Agree [ X] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

This would depend on just how child labor were defined. I understand there have been a few cases here and there where kids working on the family farm was being called child labor by some moron or another.

 

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

 

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

5. If you believe in some, but not complete licensing power, indicate three trades, professions, businesses, etc. which should be licensed:

a) _______Medical field_______________________________________

b) _____________Law_________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

List three which should not be licensed:

a) _____________Education_________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

E.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [X ] No response [ ]

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ X] No response [ ]

I say this in full awareness of my lack of knowledge. But if the government exists to protect rights, then I hate to deny the government the power to step in when needed.

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ x] No response [ ]

5. If you favor a partial, but not complete set of government standards, name three products or services for which standards should be set by government:

a) ______________________________________________

b) ______________________________________________

c) ______________________________________________

 

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs?

Yes/Agree [x ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits?

Yes/Agree [x ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights?

Yes/Agree x[ ] No/Disagree [ ] No response [ ]

G.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ x] No response [ ]

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws.

Yes/Agree [ ] No/Disagree [ x] No response [ ]

[LeSellers]

3 hours ago, Vort said:

Celestial law is completely different from the laws of man that we are talking about. Celestial law is always by voluntary covenant, made by those who have proven themselves honest and upright in all things. The two situations sound similar, but in reality are so fundamentally different that they really are not comparable.

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

Are you saying our laws and governments here on earth should not reflect in any way what we understand of G-d and his laws?

Until we have angels in charge of the government, we will have to settle for imperfect men. These men must do as little as possible to maintain peace and protect the rights of individuals, and do nothing else at all, lest their intrusions constrain rights and trammel liberties.

Further, God's government is based on agency: the freedom to do as one pleases while under obligation to accept the direct (not legalistic) consequences of those acts. "… for this eternal truth is given, God will force no man to heaven." Government is force, it is the monopoly on lethal force. Any law, even the ones regarding fines for over due library books, are based on the state's power to kill you. Resist long enough, strenuously enough, and they will kill you.

Lehi

 

[Traveler]

20 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Until we have angels in charge of the government, we will have to settle for imperfect men. These men must do as little as possible to maintain peace and protect the rights of individuals, and do nothing else at all, lest their intrusions constrain rights and trammel liberties.

Further, God's government is based on agency: the freedom to do as one pleases while under obligation to accept the direct (not legalistic) consequences of those acts. "… for this eternal truth is given, God will force no man to heaven." Government is force, it is the monopoly on lethal force. Any law, even the ones regarding fines for over due library books, are based on the state's power to kill you. Resist long enough, strenuously enough, and they will kill you.

Lehi

 

And how is any of this different than the laws of G-d's kingdom?  If there is rebellion against any of G-d's laws - is not death the punishment? - fall of man case in point.  Death for tasting fruit that does not belong to or given to us?

 

My pint is that what we learn from G-d should be incorporated in to our lives - as much as possible into our mortal lives.  That seeking out divine principles in our government is a good thing - not something that should be avoided or ignored.

 

The Traveler

Edited March 6, 2016 by Traveler

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Traveler said:

Just wondering - would it change anyone's responses if the government we are considering was the government and laws by which the Celestial Kingdom (note the term "Kingdom") is governed?

It would change mine.  Our rights are God-given, not man-given.  So, God can take them away and it will be his right to take back that which is his (everything).  But when man seeks to take it away, that is quite different.

[Vort]

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

Are you saying our laws and governments here on earth should not reflect in any way what we understand of G-d and his laws?

Not sure how you managed to pull that meaning out of what I wrote, but no, I am not saying anything remotely resembling that.

[kapikui]

6 hours ago, Traveler said:

Are you saying our laws and governments here on earth should not reflect in any way what we understand of G-d and his laws?

That depends.  God's laws are perfect and run by a perfect individual.  Such an organization is problematic when run by wicked people.  The advantage to the U.S. constitution (as written, not as we currently "interpret" it), is that if followed, most of the populace can be wicked and still not have tyranny.   A perfect organization run by a perfect individual need not have all of the deliberate inefficiencies built in to protect against such things.  And would be much better.  Of course until I have a 100% guarantee that only perfect individuals will run such a government, I'll take a constitutionally limited government. 

Edited March 6, 2016 by kapikui

[LeSellers]

19 minutes ago, kapikui said:

That depends.  God's laws are perfect and run by a perfect individual.  Such an organization is problematic when run by wicked people.  The advantage to the U.S. constitution (as written, not as we currently "interpret" it), is that if followed, most of the populace can be wicked and still not have tyranny.

John Adams disagreed.

His words are telling, at least to me:
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

19 minutes ago, kapikui said:

A perfect organization run by a perfect individual need not have all of the deliberate inefficiencies built in to protect against such things.  And would be much better.  Of course until I have a 100% guarantee that only perfect individuals will run such a government, I'll take a constitutionally limited government. 

Exactly.

As far as I can tell, we have not had anything near perfect individuals running our government. A constitutionally limited government is our only hope to guard our freedoms.

Lehi

Edited March 6, 2016 by LeSellers

[LeSellers]

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

And how is any of this different than the laws of G-d's kingdom?  If there is rebellion against any of G-d's laws - is not death the punishment? - fall of man case in point.  Death for tasting fruit that does not belong to or given to us?

Your case in point illustrates mine. Death was not the result of sin, it was the result of something in the fruit: something that changed Adam's body to make it mortal. It was the natural result of touching the fruit, not of disobedience, per se.

Even Satan, the ultimate rebel, is dead spiritually, not physically. He is limited in where he can go.

Earthly governments kill, destroy in that realm where they have sway. God does not do that; He banishes, quite a different concept.

Further, He banishes us to a place where we are willing to go. Indeed, all of His punishments are for our benefit, and even His commandments are both beneficial and voluntary to the extent that our obedience is not coerced, as earthly laws are.

Lehi

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Your case in point illustrates mine. Death was not the result of sin, it was the result of something in the fruit: something that changed Adam's body to make it mortal. It was the natural result of touching the fruit, not of disobedience, per se.

I think you better support such an idea with...something.

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Even Satan, the ultimate rebel, is dead spiritually, not physically. He is limited in where he can go.

Satan has no body...so he's not "alive" physically. If he's not alive, how else can you describe him but "dead". And what does that have to do with where he can go?

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Earthly governments kill, destroy in that realm where they have sway. God does not do that; He banishes, quite a different concept.

I'm not sure I see the distinction. If we're going to wrest meanings, then killing is merely banishing one from their bodies.

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Further, He banishes us to a place where we are willing to go. Indeed, all of His punishments are for our benefit,

I do not believe this at all.

[Guest]

m fairly surprised at a lot of people's responses.  I thought @Jojo Bags and @Vort were more libertarian.  But I guess not.  I thought @Backroads  was more authoritarian.  But she seemed more libertarian than Jojo.  The only one more libertarian than I am is @LeSellers.  I think I even beat out Kapikui. 

Here is my commentary.

1. Graduated tax rates on income? This is right out of the communist manifesto.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  And it makes no sense.  The more you contribute to the economy, the more you are penalized? The only reason we even have this is to pay for bigger and bigger govt.  If govt were the size it should be, we'd have no need of such revenues.

2. An unrestricted power in government to tax inheritances? The thing people miss about inheritance is that our economy was never meant to be individual, but rather familial.  We improve our condition not just in one generation (with obvious exceptions) but across generations.  The vast majority of families start out poor, but each successive generation improves their situation.  Inheritance taxes will prevent this progression.*

3. A return to the gold and silver standard of the Constitution? I hear @kapikui about the reality.  No, it is not likely.  But neither are most of the questions on this list.  It is about the ideal.

4. Federal regulation of transportation and communication businesses? I believe there should always be public paths of transportation to prevent anyone from being land-locked.  But apart from that the government should have no "regulatory" role in this.

5. A system of free public education? No.  Just look at what the system has devolved into, folks.  It is nothing but a socialist indoctrination facility.  Sure, some people actually get out learning to read and write... But the vast majority come out with a socialist set of values above all else.

1. For the purpose of providing for the less fortunate, do you feel government should have the power to completely equalize all incomes? No.

2. If not, do you believe the poor have some claim on government for their subsistence needs? No.

1. Should government have the power to prohibit child labor? Previously commented.

2. Should government have the power to set minimum wages? No.

3. Should government have the power to license every economic activity?No.

4. Should government be completely without such licensing power? Previously commented.

1. Government should have the power to regulate the operation of all economic activities.

2. Government should not have the power to regulate any legitimate economic activity. I need a definition for this word.  It is not being used in a manner that I would define it. But again I agree with kapikui when he supports a truth in commerce provision in the law.

3. If you believe in some, but not complete government regulation, do you feel you could draw a precise line between those activities which should and should not be regulated?

4. Government should have the power to set minimum standards for all goods and services.  They can set them.  But it should be up to business and the public whether they think it's important.

1. Should government have the power to bring waste lands into production and engage in soil conservation programs? I'm not exactly sure what this is getting at. I need more input.

2. Should government have the power to control natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests and mineral deposits? Only those which are required for national defense.  I have no idea why anyone would be in favor of any more control than that.  I see NO benefit. It should all be privately owned.  But the government should take a pro-active role in protection of private property rights.

3. Should governments sell to private individuals all the land they now own except that which is necessary for defense and protection of rights? If we can include the land-locked property provision as part of the protection of rights, yes.

1. I believe that there is a distinct line between those circumstances under which the government should compel people against their will and those where it should not.  Govt should only compel when there has been a crime committed.  Necessarily, taxes will almost always be compulsory.

2. I believe that the scriptures provide accurate guidance regarding the distinction between good and bad laws. As commented before, but specifically D&C 134 in addition to a few dozen other scriptures sprinkled throughout.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Guest

[Traveler]

18 hours ago, Vort said:

Not sure how you managed to pull that meaning out of what I wrote, but no, I am not saying anything remotely resembling that.

The words you chose concerning these governments are "completely different".  I ask the question to specifically clarify what you actually meant or if you were using the term "figuratively".  So may I ask again for clarification?  Do you actually mean "completely different".  Or in your view of such things - should there be resemblance.

 

In my view of things - I believe there should be resemblance – as best as we understand and can emulate.  You say such are completely different - I am very curious, since you think there must be differences – what differences and why do you think it best or necessary that we force such differences in our societies?

[Guest]

*I forgot the footnote in my previous post.  An interesting article from Forbes mentioned that since 1984 a sudden shift occurred in their annual 400 list.  Previously, the great majority of wealthy in the country were inherited after generations of growth in financial power for the family.  AND a great majority of them built on previous generations of wealth to become even more wealthy.

After 1984, a great majority were first generation wealthy.  AND the inherited wealthy tended to not do much with the wealth they were given.  I believe some shifting in the fundamental principles of Americans are going out the window.  And I believe it is due to socialism/communism and public schooling destroying all the principles of righteousness that the country had at its core.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Guest

[Traveler]

16 hours ago, kapikui said:

That depends.  God's laws are perfect and run by a perfect individual.  Such an organization is problematic when run by wicked people.  The advantage to the U.S. constitution (as written, not as we currently "interpret" it), is that if followed, most of the populace can be wicked and still not have tyranny.   A perfect organization run by a perfect individual need not have all of the deliberate inefficiencies built in to protect against such things.  And would be much better.  Of course until I have a 100% guarantee that only perfect individuals will run such a government, I'll take a constitutionally limited government.

I think your understanding of “Perfect” is different than mine.  Both in regards to laws and individuals.  It is my belief that individuals that are loving, merciful, kind, just and honest will have such things reflected in the laws that govern their society.  In other words good individuals will bring about good laws.  I am not sure I believe that good law will cause individuals to be good.  Lucifer being a case in point.

 

I also believe G-d’s laws are to protect individuals – not so much his position or for that matter the position of anyone.  My views are similar to Frederic Bastiat in his book “The Law”.  I believe the first obligation of the law is to protect the innocent – the second obligation of the law is to punish the guilty.  I also agree with Frederic that efforts in the law to go beyond these two principles or purposes will result in tyranny whether it be in heaven or on earth.

[Guest]

@Traveler,

Another thing to ponder.  There have been very few societies in history that were actually successful in making socialism work.  Enoch and the post-resurrection Nephite societies come to mind.  But Enoch was translated and the Nephites required the destruction of the wicked and a personal visitation from the resurrected Christ to make it work.

But throughout history, the more freedom an economy enjoyed, the more prosperity was had by all.

And I'd submit another point.  The socialist societies that worked were done by individual acceptance of the shared responsibilities.  It was not forced on society by government.  This lack of force makes it more of a perfect libertarian society than a perfect socialist society.  And that really is how celestial principles would be applied on earth.

 

 

[Vort]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

The words you chose concerning these governments are "completely different".  I ask the question to specifically clarify what you actually meant or if you were using the term "figuratively".  So may I ask again for clarification?  Do you actually mean "completely different".  Or in your view of such things - should there be resemblance.

I mean "completely different". Of course there is "resemblance". I look completely different than a Maori, but there are many resemblances between us: Bilateral symmetry, head at the top, eyes, nose, mouth, and ears in the same relative locations, hair in the same general body areas, etc.

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

In my view of things - I believe there should be resemblance – as best as we understand and can emulate.  You say such are completely different - I am very curious, since you think there must be differences – what differences and why do you think it best or necessary that we force such differences in our societies?

Some of the more obvious examples include:

• The kingdom of heaven is a monarchy. Our government should be a democracy of some sort.
• The kingdom of heaven is governed by common consent. Our government should be by majority dictate.
• The kingdom of heaven is governed by celestial law. Our government should, indeed must, be governed by a telestial law.

[LeSellers]

16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I think you better support such an idea with...something.

Adam received the commandment that he should not touch the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, but the Temple wording is different from that of scripture. He was given the choice, but to do so, he'd have to ignore the forbidding. But we need to recall that death was an integral part of the Plan of Happiness. We should also remember that from Adam to Shem, people lived nearly a millennium. But after that, until Abram/Abraham and Moses, lifespans of two hundred years were not uncommon. Why? My mission president theorized that it was the "inbreeding" with only six ancestors (from the Ark) that concentrated the death gene, possibly from a virus transmitted by the fruit.

16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Satan has no body...so he's not "alive" physically. If he's not alive, how else can you describe him but "dead". And what does that have to do with where he can go?

Satan has a spiritual body, so he's alive spiritually. He is not "dead" in the sense I meant, i.e., does not exist in any form. He is forbidden (and he is glad for it, I think) from going to any of the kingdoms of glory for two reasons: first, he has no physical body, and second, he has no glory.

 

16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm not sure I see the distinction. If we're going to wrest meanings, then killing is merely banishing one from their bodies.

 

You're free to see things in any way you choose.

16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I do not believe this at all.

Your right.

It seems you raise trivial objections to anything I post, so may I suggest that you ignore me from here on out, as I shall you.

Lehi

 

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Adam received the commandment that he should not touch the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, but the Temple wording is different from that of scripture. He was given the choice, but to do so, he'd have to ignore the forbidding. But we need to recall that death was an integral part of the Plan of Happiness. We should also remember that from Adam to Shem, people lived nearly a millennium. But after that, until Abram/Abraham and Moses, lifespans of two hundred years were not uncommon. Why? My mission president theorized that it was the "inbreeding" with only six ancestors (from the Ark) that concentrated the death gene, possibly from a virus transmitted by the fruit.

Interestingly...speculative.

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

Satan has a spiritual body, so he's alive spiritually. He is not "dead" in the sense I meant, i.e., does not exist in any form. He is forbidden (and he is glad for it, I think) from going to any of the kingdoms of glory for two reasons: first, he has no physical body, and second, he has no glory.

I've never read anything in any gospel that I can recall the refers to "death" in terms of not existing at all.

1 hour ago, LeSellers said:

It seems you raise trivial objections to anything I post, so may I suggest that you ignore me from here on out, as I shall you.

Out of the hundreds of posts you've had I think I've ever even replied to something like 20 of them.

I don't consider the matter trivial. If you do that's fine, but it doesn't mean I'm simply attacking any trivial little thing. I'm discussing. If you don't want to then don't. But I'm not sure why you're being hostile. The fact that I see things differently than you sometimes does not make me hostile to you. Nothing in my response was hostile. I was very careful to put things in terms of my beliefs, the way I see things, etc. So I'm not sure where the "why don't you just ignore me" anger stems from. Insecurity? I'm really not sure.

I don't plan on ignoring you. If you wish to ignore me that is your choice, of course. Makes me a bit sad, but do as you will.