Pacific_Victory

What think you Historumites? Is this axiom generally true? What are some relevant historical examples?

funakison

As a general rule you are right. If it aint broke dont fix it. No need for heavy handed government. But in a crisis the powers that be have to step up to the plate and take charge.

civfanatic

Well, the Somali and Congolese governments barely exist and thus barely govern at all, so naturally Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo should be the most prosperous nations of the world?

Kevinmeath

You mean they are not?

It would seem the perfect place for 'Private Enterprise' to flourish therefore they must be.

Look how while the banks did without the 'heavy hand' of government and 'red tape' to hold them back.

One of the 'problems' (and only one its complex) was the London 'British' government believed whole heartedly in 'small government', it wasn't the governments place to 'interfrere with the market', private enterprise will meet the need.

Well that worked !!!!

The Cell

Exactly my thinking, if anything, the saying only seems to work when applied the opposite way round... Just look at China ....

The merchant of Venice

The privatization of british railroads was a disaster, as far as I know

jehosafats

Its easy for those living in rural or suburban areas to say that. People living in major metropolitan areas might be less inclined to accept it as true.

jeroenrottgering

It depends what you consider good. Do you see authoritarianism as the way, or do you more feel positive towards anarchy?

Rongo

Like most things, the answer lies between the extremes. Too much government is bad, but too little government is bad too. The key is finding the right balance.

DreamWeaver

some sort of anarchist utopia perhaps