If we run the state by referendums, we would be directing ourselves in complete opposite directions. Namely, every one of us, the rich and the poor alike, would want less taxes and more spending. Every popular regime goes for the contradictory pathways. The result, of course, is the huge national debt.
What is wrong, about the referendum is not only in that there is no one that takes the responsibility of the government facing the impossible tasks of reconciling the discrepancy. Could the UK government deal with the EU and land on a deal? Should the people that voted the referendum be responsible for the outcome? Unless you are voting on something like term limit, placing responsibilities on the voters may not be, responsible.
So going on for contradictory pathways is in some ways, democratic. There are voices of people wanting less taxes and more spending.
In the State of the Union address, President Trump posed some propositions that are contradictory. He stated, he does not want socialism.
It could only be a politically framing a bad image of the good people in the Congress talking about the people that need the government help, more than the wealthy. It could only be aiming at using the popular political slogan for those insists upon smaller government. It could only be some says of sending signals that we are for the successful, and surely you are one of them, right?
President Trump, then, went on with his speech on, however, infrastructure.
In this contradictory statement, he is claiming either building infrastructure is not socialism or he is compromising. The huge spending by the government will bring jobs indeed. A plain socialistic tactics that boosts the economy by providing the necessary infrastructure that benefit -- all of us. All for us! Does that sound familiar? It is socialistic idea. The government that builds the road won't be using them; it is the people that use them.
We should take his vision carefully, and not be dazzled by his very democratic appeal.
What is wrong, about the referendum is not only in that there is no one that takes the responsibility of the government facing the impossible tasks of reconciling the discrepancy. Could the UK government deal with the EU and land on a deal? Should the people that voted the referendum be responsible for the outcome? Unless you are voting on something like term limit, placing responsibilities on the voters may not be, responsible.
So going on for contradictory pathways is in some ways, democratic. There are voices of people wanting less taxes and more spending.
In the State of the Union address, President Trump posed some propositions that are contradictory. He stated, he does not want socialism.
It could only be a politically framing a bad image of the good people in the Congress talking about the people that need the government help, more than the wealthy. It could only be aiming at using the popular political slogan for those insists upon smaller government. It could only be some says of sending signals that we are for the successful, and surely you are one of them, right?
President Trump, then, went on with his speech on, however, infrastructure.
In this contradictory statement, he is claiming either building infrastructure is not socialism or he is compromising. The huge spending by the government will bring jobs indeed. A plain socialistic tactics that boosts the economy by providing the necessary infrastructure that benefit -- all of us. All for us! Does that sound familiar? It is socialistic idea. The government that builds the road won't be using them; it is the people that use them.
We should take his vision carefully, and not be dazzled by his very democratic appeal.