What constitues as a good government?

[Glasgif]

A college professor asked me the question "what makes a good government" during our conversation on American history. I replied "a good government is one that makes its people happy." What makes a government good?

A government should provide its inhabitants with shelter, food, medical care, and rural/industrial growth. It is essential to have a building system to keep the people safe from weather elements. The government has to provide food or the ability to obtain it. A medical care system is necessary. The government has to have the ability to grow both rural and industrially. A good government must at least have these four ideals to be considered good.

What is your opinion on what a good government should be?

[Fabolous]

Moved to Mudpit

[Last Roman]

it's subjective really. Based on the culture, government can be shaped/formed/and provide (or not provide) in many ways. Ultimately, whatever the culture, a government should (IMO) provide safety from both outsiders and those within the nation/country/region from eachother. A government should keep the majority of the population happy while providing safety. Now, what that happiness entails is subjective to the culture. I just gave the basics.

[Erik]

Governments are just like companies.
We, the tax payer, give them money and expect good service in return.

What constitutes to good service is open to debate of course, and that's why we need democracy and political parties bashing each others brains in all the time.

[DariusEG]

For one thing, I would say a good decentralized foundation. For two main reasons:

I believe it would keep power from becoming centralized. Which has several negative effects towards a country.

Increase in efficiency and service to the citizens.

[ForgottenImmortal]

A good government is a government that is of the people, by the people and for the people.

[Last Roman]

For one thing, I would say a good decentralized foundation. For two main reasons:

I believe it would keep power from becoming centralized. Which has several negative effects towards a country.

Increase in efficiency and service to the citizens.

the catch 22 of your ideal government is that it is harder for a decentralized gov't to be efficient.

[Aristophanes]

the catch 22 of your ideal government is that it is harder for a decentralized gov't to be efficient.

Not at all. Decentralization, when well implemented, can be more efficient for a variety of reasons:

a)diseconomies of scale: Diseconomies of scale are the forces that cause larger firms to produce goods and services at increased per-unit costs. You can read all about them here.

b)competition: Choice. As long as there are better places to go within the borders of their country, people will go there. Provincial migration is a major reason for changes to tax structure/regulation in BC and Saskatchewan, provinces surrounding destination Alberta, a province with lower taxes and more capable civil service. Competition is the main driving force behind change, and decentralization, by providing alternatives, drives competition.

c)voter-politician proximity: A person who lives in Saskatoon, SK can have no real idea how well federal money is spent in Lac Jean Pierre, Quebec; but he can have a pretty good idea how the municipality spent its money on that new school, or on the new subdivisions. The closer a voter is to the centre of power, and the closer the centre of power is to its hinterlands, the more readily its performance can be evaluated by Joe voter. Switzerland, for example, is one of the most politically decentralized countries in the world (if not the most), and I don't think anyone would accuse the various Swiss governments of being 'inefficient'.

[turtle]

I think Master Kong said it best. In order for a government to fulfill its duties as a government it must make sure the three are in good quality.

1. Confidence of the People
2. Food for the people (water included)
3. Ample military equipment

The confidence of the people would include government services, rights, laws etc.

[Last Roman]

Not at all. Decentralization, when well implemented, can be more efficient for a variety of reasons

I should have said generally. Yes, there are some examples where that is the case (you gave switzerland as a perfect example) but for large countries (in land size and population wise) that is generally not the case.

[Aristophanes]

I should have said generally. Yes, there are some examples where that is the case (you gave switzerland as a perfect example) but for large countries (in land size and population wise) that is generally not the case.

Don't you think that the larger the country, the more urgent the case for decentralization becomes? I really believe that the distance between voter and center of power has a huge effect on the efficiency of the system. How many unnecessary wars would America have engaged in had the states and municipalities had greater powers?

[Erik]

For one thing, I would say a good decentralized foundation.

I think that's too much of a generalization.

Most things are best managed locally.
But some things are definitely better managed at a single, centralized place.

Just think about infrastructure: better to have one centralized government that plans and constructs a national highway grid than to have every village construct it's own short roads that only connect to it's neighbors.

Governments do tend to centralize too much though.
Probably because more centralization=more power and $$$ for the politicians working at national/federal level.

And the EU is king at centralization: not a single building can be constructed without interference from Brussels/Strassburg.
Totally unnecessary.

[Cojones of the Scipiones]

A good government is one that provides stability and high socioeconomic mobility.

[turd]

The most minimal one.

Thread over.

[Cluny the Scourge]

You need only ask any citizen in any civilised nation to know that there's no such thing as a good government. Everyone in every nation says their government is especially terrible. Just choose someone at random in a bar.

[Erik]

You need only ask any citizen in any civilised nation to know that there's no such thing as a good government. Everyone in every nation says their government is especially terrible. Just choose someone at random in a bar.

If there aren't any good governments then I wonder why our lives are so comfortable, secure, and free.

[Sit down, fat dog]

Integrity and competence.

[Lord Rahl]

Aristotle said governments come in two forms,

A state with only one ruler is either a monarchy or a tyrrany;

A state with several rulers is either an aristocracy or an oligarchy; and

A state in which all rule is either a polity or a democracy.

Now, a democracy to Aristotle is one where the demos, or mob is the government. That is, everyone gets to vote, everyone is the ruler. It isn't our modern form of democracy.

To me a good government is that which protects the people and stays out of the people's way. To me that is a sort of conservative/libertarian government.

[Armfelt]

Now, a democracy to Aristotle is one where the demos, or mob is the government. That is, everyone gets to vote, everyone is the ruler. It isn't our modern form of democracy.

To me a good government is that which protects the people and stays out of the people's way. To me that is a sort of conservative/libertarian government.

Aristoteles also said that slaves are slaves by nature and it's best for them to have total obiedience sine that is the only thing that they can do. Sure sounds democratic...

[Sit down, fat dog]

Democracy in Athens was the same democracy we have today, in some places, in some situations. You need to make the distinction between direct and representative democracy.