|reply to FFH |
Re: Free for all
said by FFH:Sorry about that - I'm not following this thread as closely as you are. Missed that little tidbit.
This particular msg thread started with this post:
»Re: Free for all
where the poster decided gov't should just seize a private company and take over.
Government has power of eminent domain but one hopes that power is used sparingly. As you posted the 5th amendment requires just compensation of confiscated property.
My post was about notion government should not compete with private enterprise. That private companies and only private companies are the one to decide how society operates. I reject that premise. Business operates at the pleasure of the people and is subservient to common good.
quote:Government (.gov) is NOT supposed to be in business (.com[mercial) .
My post was about notion government should not compete with private enterprise.
Same as 'religion', which it is NOT to 'establish'.
They're in everyone's business..
|reply to buccaneere |
said by buccaneere:What does that mean?
Government is NOT supposed to be in business .
If I understand you correctly Government should not be involved in Police, Fire, Water, Sewer, roads etc. All those services were once provided by private business. At some point people decided it was best to manage those activities for public good.
For years phone service was a highly regulated monopoly. Is it your opinion that was improper?
Who gets to set the rules of the game, private companies or elected officials?