[metamet]

On that note, one of Elizabeth Warren's primary focuses seems to be the concept of who the government works for. To that end, the boogieman of "big government" can either be positioned as something that fights for its citizens or fights for special interests and corporations.

I think the idea of "Big Government" is amorphous, in that is calls into question the purpose of a governing body.

Who, or what, should be the governments number one priority? It seems universal that keeping its citizens safe (military, police) and supplying fundamental services (roads, fire departments) are accepted by all but the most jetpacky libertarians. Do we believe that we have the capacity to extend other foundations of wellbeing to be rights as well? This is the crossroads we're at with healthcare, protecting the environment (by investing in clean technologies and slowing down the harm we're inflicting through other practices), and living wages?

That's what I see as the crux of this conversation. Who does the government work for? And who SHOULD it be working for?

[AnimalMuppet]

Here's the problem: Humans are not angels.

We, the people, we are not angels. So we need government to protect us from each other.

But those people in government? They aren't angels, either. So the trick is to have the government keep us from harming and oppressing each other, without the government harming and oppressing us. That was the point of the "limited government" idea, and the Constitution - government couldn't do everything; it could only do a few specific things. That is, they optimized for minimizing the harm government could do, rather than for maximizing the good.

And it's worked reasonably well, though not perfectly, even while government grew enormously compared to the original idea. Still, the fact remains that government is not run by angels. Those programs that you think are a good idea? Imagine that they're being run by selfish, foolish, corrupt people. Are they still a good idea? (Some may be. Surely not all, though...)

Reminding people of who the government works for may help, somewhat, for some time. But it won't really fix the problem.

[malandrew]

> And who SHOULD it be working for?

The people that employ them: taxpayers.

[metamet]

I completely agree with you.

[malandrew]

Honestly, I look at what we can measure and monitor at big tech companies today and there's nothing I want more than metrics driven legislation.

There is no reason that we should be passing any legislation today without attached measurable criteria for success and criteria of measurable side effects that might be impacted. If the legislation does actually measurably improve something or causes unwanted side effects, it should be removed automatically. In 2019, we absolutely have the technology to run the government the exact same way as tech companies.

So many of the services the government provides could easily be metered and we charge citizens directly based on what they individually consume instead of indiscriminately taxing people to pay for those services.