ArthurDent's Journal: What is government anyway?

I got into a discussion with Brad Wardell over at Joe User a few weeks ago about different views on taxes. I was presented as the "Democratic" view point, and to a large extent that's probably a fair assessment. However, I didn't come to that conclusion because I'm some sort of lemming following a crowd. It comes from a positive definition of what government is. I've been pondering this for a while and I think I've got it where I want it now. So here goes!

As a starting point, let me put forth a basic definition that I will expand upon as we go forward. What we call government is really about working together to make our country a better place. We have governments because we realize that there are things that we can't do just on our own individually.

Obviously, we need a way to engage ourselves in the international community, and a way in some sense to defend our inetrests against other nations. We need a united front, so it is a natural function of government to execute a foreign policy and to build a military so that those policies are enforceable. In order for this to happen, all wage-earning citizens contribute a portion of their wages, not only to pay soldiers, but also diplomats.

It is typically the government's function to ensure order and safety within our borders. We give up a portion of our resources and some of our freedoms to ensure that society can function in an orderly manner. Our monies go to pay police officers and fire fighters.

By now, to a large extent, the governed have worked to ensure the safety and security of all citizens within their borders. Presumably, the governed are safe from outside attack and safe from rampant crime and danger.

Here's where things get really interesting. Some of the governed still have problems. Some are homeless. Some can't make a living with the skills that they have. Some have made bad choices and are left in an untenable position. Some are put in bad situations by bad physical or mental health, which can result from old age or young. Some lack education. In some of these cases their situation is their own fault, sometimes not. The question becomes two-fold:

1. Do we as a people want to help them?
2. Are we as a people willing to put our money where our mouth is?

You see, we live in an imperfect world that is inhabited by imperfect people. In a perfect world none of this would happen. There wouldn't be any needy, either because the circumstances were prevented, or because individuals would work to help the people in need. Sadly, neither of those things happen. People walk by homeless people on the street every day without thinking a lick about how they got there or how they could help. It's a fact. Humans are self-centered beings, but deep down we have a sense that it is better to help people. That belief is not natural for us however.

So where does that leave us, and where does government fit in? Our government "for the people" gives us a framework from which we can choose to help people and make it stick. We allow the majority of voters (theoretically at least) to decide how our resources get farmed out. We define penalties to impose on each other when we fail to contribute to each other's welfare. Sometimes we allow those resources to go to social programs to help those less fortunate. Sometimes we choose to get some of that money back for ourselves.

So now, we defined why we have government, and why it's important with respect to social endeavors. Government affords us an opportunity to contribute to each other's welfare. The amount we choose to do that with is fluid, based on the whims of the governed.

So what should be the methodology behind not only how much we give, but how it's spent? This is where philosophy ends and practicality begins, so I'm going to leave this here for now and come back to it in another entry, hopefully soon!