Hopyfully, not much and not very.
Nothing would be federal. Each city would control its own laws, statutes, police force, and contribution to the overall military. The government is an unnecessary middle man existant only to perpetuate its own existance; like a mafia ring squeezing its victims for protection money. I mean taxes.
To live. To work. To own property.
In an objectivist country as described, things would be corporate run, not federally run.
Thanks Eric Clapton and Iluminaughty.
Nothing would be federal. Each city would control its own laws, statutes, police force, and contribution to the overall military. The government is an unnecessary middle man existant only to perpetuate its own existance; like a mafia ring squeezing its victims for protection money. I mean taxes.
To live. To work. To own property.
In an objectivist country as described, things would be corporate run, not federally run.
Wait a minute! Are you extrapolating from something you’ve read? If so, you should read “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal”. That essay-compilation is mainly about the “Politics” branch of philosophy.
For the record, Objectivism holds that government is essential, not an “unnecessary middle man”.
As for letting city governments own property, but disallowing the Feds from owning it – that’s a question of implementation. There’s no reason to assume it should be so. The Federal government, regional government, State government, and so on should be able to do whatever is practical in the pursuit of their proper role. There may be some restraints, which would guard against government corruption, undue use of power, etc. However, within those limits, government may own property that is required for its function.
Thanks Eric Clapton and Iluminaughty.
Clapton doesn’t play here!
Wait a minute! Are you extrapolating from something you’ve read? If so, you should read “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal”. That essay-compilation is mainly about the “Politics” branch of philosophy.
For the record, Objectivism holds that government is essential, not an “unnecessary middle man”.
As for letting city governments own property, but disallowing the Feds from owning it – that’s a question of implementation. There’s no reason to assume it should be so. The Federal government, regional government, State government, and so on should be able to do whatever is practical in the pursuit of their proper role. There may be some restraints, which would guard against government corruption, undue use of power, etc. However, within those limits, government may own property that is required for its function.
:dough: Clapton doesn’t play here!
That’s why I’m not an objectivist. Because I’m an anarchist. Most all of my other beliefs go along with objectivism, however. Most, not all. In fact its on the border for me to say some, but not enough to change what I said.
Thanks Eric Clapton [snip]
You’re welcome… now I’m off to practice my latest rendition of Layla.