Localizing government/objections

< Localizing government
Revision as of 18:48, 29 June 2011 by Woozle (talk | contribs) (saving work for now)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Larger-scale government has always been seen as advantageous over localized government for these reasons:

  • it is able to act as quickly in dealing with problems on a larger scale
  • can achieve goals that are too large or expensive for smaller governments or organizations
  • can impose uniform quality standards (e.g. food safety, human rights, access to medical services)


The issue of "standards" may be particularly worrisome to individuals of a more liberal bent, who have traditionally turned to the federal government on issues such as:

  • safety regulations and other rules enforcing decent working conditions
  • preventing bigotry (e.g. racism, anti-gay sentiments) from being enshrined in local law, and preventing companies and services from following explicitly exclusionary policies
  • environmental regulations:
    • preventing one region from polluting resources common to more than one region, with the consent of most local individuals
    • preventing wealthy and influential interests from polluting resources owned by less-wealthy individuals, with the local government's (purchased) consent

It should be possible to address most or all of these issues within the framework laid out in localizing government; this is a TO DO.