Did you know there is a situation existing right now that embarrasses the HECK out of those who believe big government is absolutely essential? I direct you to Belgium. Essentially what has happened is that political squabbles got so bad that the politicians have left that country without a functioning government... for the past eight months.
And the result? Did the country collapse and is everybody dying of poverty? Quite the contrary.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-belgium-impasse-20110221,0,2958446.story
Unable — or unwilling — to work together, bickering politicians have left unassuming Belgium without a fully functioning government for eight months, the longest for any nation in Europe since World War II.
Through most of that time, few Belgians, let alone the outside world, even seemed to notice. Trains continue to run, waffles are still being grilled on street corners, and people window-shop along centuries-old arcades. Tourists still sample mussels, go for overpriced canal rides in Bruges and snap up Tintin souvenirs, blissfully unaware of a political crisis.
Maybe, just maybe, having a functioning government passing new laws just isn't as essential as Harry Reid and Obama want us to think.
So, go ahead and shut down the government. We'd save money, time, and grief not having to worry about what the scoundrels in Washington are trying to do to us today. Hold out for those budget cuts... but for heavens' sake, set your sights higher than a paltry $60 billion! With a $1.5 trillion deficit, we need to cut $1 trillion or more... THIS YEAR!
And maybe the prospect of no functioning government isn't so bad after all...
Having been around in Belgium a little...I will offer this insight. You have two states of reality in the country...the poorer more rural area and the richer more industrialized area. For a couple of years...the two groups got into a massive entanglement...arguing about splitting up but the truth was that half the country had no desire to split into two.
ReplyDeleteEventually, the government in charge gave up and elections were to be held. It's a funny thing...with a number of parties (not two)...you have to allow the top vote-getter to work out an agreement with enough party strength to have 50 percent or more of the country vote.
First election came and went....the winner could not form such a government. Second election has come (eight months ago), and they have yet to form a government (to meet the Constitutional requirement).
There are some caretakers in position, and the government simple continues on. You have to remember....professionals run almost all the parts of the government. There is a budget in existence and taxes simple keep pouring into that bucket. Life goes on...except there's no changes and no real discussions on TV because no one is agreeing to anything.
I would agree we could do the same thing in the US but you have that budget problem where congress has to approve it each year and the Senate agree as well. Otherwise...both could be sent home after 30 days and we wouldn't miss anything. I have long suggested that we need these guys for about 100 days a year at best. Otherwise...they aren't accomplishing anything of significance.
Ripley essentially made my point for me, but these two cases are hardly comparable. The structure of Belgium's government is markedly different than ours and if the U.S. Government actually stopped working, not just had a "partial" government shut down ("partial" being the word that everyone is omitting) then we would have troops run out of bullets in some 135 countries and poor people that depend on government services would suffer. I don't mean to insinuate that we could not function without government or that life wouldn't go on, but if it was not done with foresight and government just stopped, it would be nothing like the scenario described above.
ReplyDelete