Pull that bus over right now.

Government gives *nothing*.

All government is, is force. It has no wealth of it's own. Anything it "gives" in entitlements/benefits/bread & circuses/etc comes from taking wealth, under threat of lethal force and imprisonment, from those who worked to produce it and transfer it to someone else or to some other group.

TANSTAAFL

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

Even more so with layer upon layer of government red-tape, incompetence, ideological social-engineering foolishness, and bureaucracy.

All that government has and all the powers it exercises are voluntarily granted to government temporarily, with the sworn & solemn agreement that the government will not exceed the bounds of that which is loaned to them, in exchange for the privilege of exercising those agreed-upon powers using the agreed-upon wealth exclusively for the agreed-upon purposes.

Furthermore, the citizens have a right and a duty to alter or abolish a government that violates that trust.

Government is a necessary evil. The less the better.

A powerful central government, necessary to support and administer/enforce a centrally run government entitlement infrastructure, even if run benevolently *now*, only requires a change of politicians/party for that same power to be used for corruption, oppression, and tyranny.

Strat

And yet, many of these same people will attack you and call you all sorts of names if you dare suggest reducing the Federal government's size, power, & scope. They just seem incapable of connecting the growth of government size, power, and scope to the government abuses of their civil rights that they're becoming increasingly aware of.

The cognitive dissonance is astounding.

All governments get their power from the citizens. The more power the government has, the less power and protections from government abuse the individual citizen will have. All governments get their wealth from their citizens. The more wealth the government has/spends, the less wealth citizens will have or be able to borrow for homes, businesses, schooling, raising kids, giving to charities, etc.

Strat

The law on trespassing is that if your property is not plainly posted according to certain detailed legal requirements and you leave your door open or unlocked and someone enters your premises and/or if they cross onto your property, you may order the individual(s) to leave, and if they comply without delay, they have not committed a crime, regardless of what they may have seen while on the property and/or in the premises, and are under no legal obligation to keep it secret barring a court's order.

An internet address typed into a browser's address bar is in no way a closed or locked door, there are no signs warning against trespassing, not even any sign that there may be any private property there at all until 'enter' is pressed, nothing that's required to be present at the property owner's responsibility and cost in order to convict someone of a crime.

The whole concept being used to criminalize typing the "wrong" URL into your internet browser violates basic tenets of common law and civil rights.

This is big money working with a corrupt government and politicians of both of the major parties to both offload the security burden onto the populace, but also using the power of law and threat of lethal force to do it, which gives the government even more ability to intimidate, threaten, control, and to jail people selectively.

Gotta keep the trial lawyers, the politicians, and the private prison industry fat cats in plenty of hookers & blow while expanding their power over the population more and more.

Strat

What possible safety function does coloring a multimeter yellow serve?

Being easy to find.

A meter "being easy to find" is not a safety function.

Says a guy that's apparently never been 10 feet down a very dark and cramped concrete-lined hole, troubleshooting and changing out a failed 480V 3-phase lift-pump motor and contactor assembly.

You really should avoid offering opinions on things whens it's glaringly-obvious that you know very little about them. It's like watching the guy who decides to do a belly-flop from 45 feet. It's just painful for everyone, even the observers.

I'm not being mean here. I'm hoping it sticks and contributes in some small way to you living a happier and more productive life.

"A man's got to know his limitations." - Clint Eastwood as "Dirty" Harry Callahan in "Magnum Force"

Strat

The fact that ours doesn't is

the result of money: businesses having to much (in)direct influence.

If it doesn't lead to corrupted politicians, it's at least corrupting democracy.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

Corporations and others with money would not bother bribing/corrupting politicians in the US Federal government if those politicians had very little actual power or control, which is the way the US Constitution originally was designed.

Starting in the early 1900s with President Wilson and the Progressive movement, however, the Federal government has been constantly expanding in power and scope, making it increasingly useful and attractive for the dishonest to attempt to corrupt.

As long as there is a large centralized nexus of power rather than a distributed system, there will be corruption.

The US Constitution is a network design. Instead of data, it deals in power. Like data networks, compromising a distributed system is far more difficult than compromising a system with a single C&C point.

If you look at government as a network, it's obvious the problem lies in far too much centralization of power.

Strat

Not as ashamed as I am as an American, whose nation is supposed to be at the forefront of individual liberty and as much freedom from government regulation of, involvement in, or monitoring of the average person's life as possible while still maintaining domestic order and performing the duties necessary to conduct foreign affairs.

The further the government of the US strays from and exceeds the powers and scope granted by it's Constitution, the worse things have and will get. Not only for the US and those in it, but for the entire world...economically, diplomatically, militarily,.and from the perspective of individual liberty and freedom as well.

Where does one seek asylum from persecution when the are no more nations of free people? If there are no more nations of free people, who will stand against the next insane megalomaniac tyrant bent on world domination? And, there *will* be another. Without fail. There always will be (at least until the human race achieves Ascension :) ). The rise and fall of such describes a large chunk of the entirety of human history from the beginnings of civilization until now.

My greatest fear is that the US collapses into a full-on totalitarian police state that sees foreign aggression as the only practical means at it's disposal to feed the beast, seeing as it's economy is shot, and becomes the next threat to the entire world like WW2 Germany, squared.

Strat

"Those who willingly surrender freedom for security deserve neither and will lose both."

Not a student of history or human nature, are you? That's always the refrain of the tyrant; "It's for your own good".

Such beliefs have fueled some of the most horrible atrocities in the history of mankind and killed many tens of millions of people.

A Panopticon that's only available to those in power guarantees those in power become tyrants and the citizens become slaves.

Strat

Except that this trend towards increased government surveillance of the general populace by government intelligence and LE agencies, often in blatant violation of their nations' own laws and founding documents & principles, is a global phenomenon, particularly in the West, and no longer limited to a handful of dictatorships and totalitarian nations.

Blowing this stuff off because "just switch to a foreign provider" is short-sighted.

Individual freedom around the world, particularly digital privacy/security against intrusive, and often illegal by their own laws, digital spying by governments against their own citizens, is on a downward trend as the US and other Western nations grow increasingly paranoid and authoritarian.

The struggle against such invasive surveillance must likewise be global as these regimes work together both in the actual surveillance and also on the political side to increase their scope and power ever further.

This is particularly true among "Five Eyes" nations like Australia. What good would it do to switch to using services outside the country you're in if all the practical alternatives are just as bad or worse?

Strat

Obvious AC whoosh is obvious.

Strat :)

If I'm going carry a scooter in a case, it's going to be a guitar case!!

Obvious username is obvious.

Strat