The government could raise money by selling ads
I think a Tank with Pepsi written on the side would be pretty epic

Good = making people happy.

I agree, but I do think people find happiness in really quite stupid places.

For example. Subsidies. They're stupid. But money and job security makes people happy, and if you subsidize the steel market, most of the country won't really notice. The only ones who will are the ones that buy steel or steel products. But people are happy, even though its a waste of government time and money.

Some people are happy when they kill people. Most people would be happy to have free money. Should the government give out large amounts of money for free? (I guess they already do)

They already - _{oh you beat me to it.}

But on that note, if enough people are okay with being intolerant to say...stone people of other beliefs, that's probably their prerogative. You know, this is the largest argument against libertarians. Its a slippery slope.

The purpose of government is to ensure a minimum living standard above the poverty line for all of it's citizens (or as many as practically possible) so that everyone is living with dignity and without undue discrimination, through whatever means are required.

For those of you who haven't read Common Sense by Thomas Paine, I suggest you do. The following is something I thought of when asked about what he wrote.

I think that Paine meant government, even in its best state, IS evil, by nature. The idea of government is to, for protection of the society, limit some personal freedoms. Though, this is most often a necessary evil, because were everyone in individual tribes without a unifying government, a more organized group of people could come in and invade the disorganized and unprepared free peoples who kept no government for defense and take their resources, which might be scarce, such as the water from a river. This defense becomes necessary when a society grows too large and people start becoming less than fair with each other, or as Paine said, the vices of society which are natural. Society alone then, would be preferable to government in all cases, were it not for the lack of enough resources to share fairly with everyone in the society. So then the root cause of the downfall of society is really overpopulation, and that over time instead of everyone meeting each other and talking their differences over in a small society, which in a small society would be petty greivances anyways, the society becomes too large, and a single person is chosen to represent a larger group of people, which I consider the original society, because it becomes impractical for them to all meet after their population grows too large. Thus government is born, the collection and organization of these smaller societies, for the protection of those societies from crime. And, being a necessary evil to prevent crime, personal freedoms are limited, which the majority of the elected officials at least agree to, but at this point not necessarily the sentiment of a large group of the societies. When enough of these societies, and seperation by a large distance catalyzes this process, disagree with what the majority of the elected officials agree to, you hear people often calling the laws unjust. If unjust laws exist, they will be broken, and if no action is taken to rectify the situation, violence and civil war are the result.

You should take a few things from the above. The first is to understand the differences between society and government. The other is that in order to make everyone happy in any circumstance, you must have enough resources for everyone.

For those of you who care, I have a dream. My dream is to give plentiful resources to everyone, and I have a plan to do this. I believe we have the technology capable of making my dreams a reality today. However, I do not have sufficient funding or support to accomplish my goals as of yet. I am well aware of the consequences of giving a (I believe) still exponentially growing population of people near unlimited resources to continue doing so, and I have grand plans to allieviate this problem as well (and as a bonus it doesn't involve mass murder or genocide).

As to your being a Christian and that giving you values, I disagree with you. If you'd like me to go into more detail on that subject I will, but I don't think this thread is the appropriate place to do so.

Any reasons why you believe that? Also, out of interest, are there any governments in the world who follow that philosophy?

Although I hate the corruptability of bureaucracy, it is currently the only effective way of governing masses of people.
I seriously doubt anyone here has a perfect solution, but even if they did it's unlikely anyone would listen to them anyway.

Miltary spending is definetly an issue. Unfortunately the U.S. is the only country with the balls to go play international police. We could be like every other country and ignore others in crisis. I would glad to see China step up with all the money they have and start helping other countries.

They really do quite a good job of indoctrinating you in school, don't they? Shining city upon a hill and all that.

Most social democracies do just that, and a lot of other countries aim to. They just fail for any number of reasons, a common one being not enough funds.

Who said it was school? I'm really tired of your 'hurrdurr Americun' attitude. I'll admit the school system leaves a lot to be desired, but given the internet there is more misinformation other there than what lies in our borders.

Actually I'm dismissive of anyone who can't think for themselves and has no grasp of what the world is really like globally.

In my opinion, I put you among those people.

The attitude strikes once again!
Why don't you enlighten me on exactly what happens in the world?
Are you going to rant about how the U.S. supported dictators like in cambodia where there was a genocide?
Are you upset that that U.S. went into Veitnam to stop the spread of communism without thinking things through?
Are you going to suggest that the U.S. only interferes when there is a reason for economic gain?
Is America only in it because they have to stick to old doctrines that you think are outdated?
Let me ask you sir.
Who came to the aid of Haiti when there was an earthquake that destroyed almost everything? America
Who came to the aid of Chile in the earthquake the followed? America
Who is giving in the wake of the earthquake and subsequent tsunami in Japan?
Who joined two world wars, not because they wanted to, but because they were under threat of an attack and the proceeded to end those wars that could have had gone much longer and resulted in more deaths? Then who rebuilt Japan after it was bombed?
Who brought an end to the subsequent standoff between Russia and the U.S.?
Who toppled a dictator in Afganistan to support the people who wanted freedom?
Who is Currently fighting to defend the people of Lybia from the laughable dictator Gaddafi and his forces?
Who first set foot on the moon?
Who was the first modern democracy?
What country invented almost all of modern technology?

Even when America has made mistakes, it's intentions have been correct.
And I think we are winning in another area that you might not think is that important: Patriotism

Yip, no other countries. It was all American.
Again, only America, no other countries helped.
Yip, America again, no other countries. Looks like we've got a trifecta!
The US didn't play much of a role in the European theatre in WW2. Mainly you just defended yourselves against the Japanese.
Blow a country up, kill tens of thousands of people and then act like you've done some magnanimous task by helping to rebuild them. Nice.
Clearly only America. It had nothing to do with how Russia was run at all.
I think you mean Iraq, actually. Lets just ignore how many civilians died, shall we?
That would be NATO, of which the US is a member.
An American. But that has little to do with America being the world's police or some-such.
The United Kingdom.
Depends what you're counting as 'modern' doesn't it? I'd probably have to go with the UK again, starting with the industrial revolution.
Yeah, it's intentions to completely dominate the middle east to ensure control of it's oil supply are "correct".
Heh, yeah, blind patriotism is such a virtue. I wish my country could 'win' at patriotism.

looks like someone is jealous that they aren't #1
America was the leading aid in haiti *WIN*
America donated massive ammounts of medical supplies to help ChileWHAT NOW?
Japan? Pick one and run with it You've just got helped!
WW2? what about D-Day? Who attacked the U.S. First? Who rebuilt Japan after we kicked their butts for messing with us? Japan models itself after the U.S. so don't give me that crap.
Noone cares who lost the Cold War
my mistake on iraq O.o
In libya the US fires over 110 missles. US and UK combined: 114
False the UK was NOT a modern democracy.
Technology? Well that's your oppinion and you had to add constraints that it depended on what is considered modern.
Oil? Possibly. I don't see there to be anything wrong with fighting to keep your nations energy demands met.....
Nobody said americas patriotism was blind

THE ABSOLUTE BEST THING EVER ABOUT AMERICA IS:

THAT is what makes America the best place ever.
America is just a badass country because we tend to overdo everything
I also found an epic video on youtube that doesn't really belong in this thread because this is serious discussion.

Yeah, I'm jealous, you got me.

They tend to overdo everything, apparently.

. From http://www.staredit.net/topic/12893/#269717 . I'm pretty sure that the "constituent populations" bit is essential.

Lathanide, don't be annoying. Countries that mind their own business are all well and good, but if everyone were a Sweden (well, if the US was), the world would be communist by now. Which I'm not against, incidentally. As long as it's Russian-imposed communism. But I would expect you to mind. The United States is also the driver of scientific/technological growth (Intel, IBM, AMD, Microsoft, Apple, Texas Instruments, Motorola, the list goes on and on) and has been for the past hundred years, one of the two countries who has ever gotten off its ass and done something in space, and, in general, been on the forefront of everything for quite a while. You can rail all you want, but until you give me concrete, refutable reasons (or any reasons, really) for your odd hatred, it's pretty useless going further.