Americans' Least Favorite Company Isn't Even a Company. Can You Guess What It Is?

No matter their age or political persuasion, Americans have similar thoughts on this one.



According to a new Axios Harris Poll, Americans' least favorite company is the U.S. government.

The fact that the U.S. government even made it onto the list is surprising in itself, considering the fact that it's not actually a company. A sample of 6,188 Americans were asked to name the company they believed to have the best reputation and the one with the worst. Then, Axios and Harris took the top 100 "most visible" companies and asked a separate group of 18,228 people to rate them based on a variety of factors.

Last year the U.S. government didn't make the "most visible" list. This year it did, and the results speak for themselves.

Political party identification didn't matter. "Republicans ranked the government #95 out of the 100 companies, Democrats ranked it #98, and independents put it dead last," Axios says. (Independents make up the largest percentage of Americans, so it shouldn't be surprising if their responses counted more toward the final ranking.)

Age didn't matter either. The U.S. government is the second-least-favorite company among millennials, the least favorite among Generation Xers, and the third-least-favorite among Baby Boomers. The pre–Baby Boom "silent generation" ranked it seventh to last.

So why don't Americans like their government? "They're just fed up—fed up with the shutdowns, the subpoenas, the wall," Harris Poll CEO John Gerzema tells Axios. "It comes out as one perpetual negative news cycle [that] really drives down your reputation." President Donald Trump doesn't help things either, Axios says. (The Trump Organization is Americans' third-least-favorite company.)

The U.S. government did poorly in all areas. Respondents said it has the second-to-worst business trajectory, organizational character, and vision, as well as the third-worst products and services, growth, and citizenship. The government was ranked as the worst company in terms of both ethics and trust, though it did earn the #96 spot in the culture category. And just nine percent of respondents said they agree that the government "shares my values."

In fact, the pollsters report,

the traditional issues government was once expected to solve are now offered by Americans as invitations to business. For example, 54% of the public want companies to make an impact on Job Creation, but only 24% feel companies are actually having a positive impact. Similarly the public also wants companies to address Immigration (41%), Education (59%), Health Care (66%), Environment (49%) but feel more can be done, as less than 20% feel companies are making a positive impact across these issues.

These attitudes are not terribly surprising. Last month, Reason's Nick Gillespie noted that a record-high number of Americans consider the government to be "the most important threat facing the U.S." According to Gallup, 35 percent of Americans believe that to be true, compared to the previous high of 33 percent back when the government was shut down in 2013.

With so many people disliking the government, it's fair to wonder how a presidential candidate like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) will be able to appeal to mainstream voters. After all, the socialism that Sanders espouses would mean the government gets more involved in people's lives. But if people already think the government is doing a bad job as it is, why would they vote for more government?

Maybe they won't. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released earlier this week, just 18 percent of respondents view the term socialism in a positive light, compared to 50 percent who view it negatively. Support for socialism can shift greatly based on how the term itself is defined, as Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown has explained. But these polls seem to suggest that many Americans are looking for less government, not more.

NEXT: White House's New Budget Gimmick: Include Immigration Enforcement Spending in the Uncapped Budget for Foreign Wars

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. >>>But if people already think the government is doing a bad job as it is, why would they vote for more government?

    people are stupid and marketing works.

    1. Baaaaaaaa

    2. IS as if Reason has forgoton all about The Myth of the Rational Voter.

    3. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

  2. “…and independents put it dead last,”

    Still too high a rating.

    1. Eleven.

  3. “With so many people disliking the government, it’s fair to wonder how a presidential candidate like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I?Vt.) will be able to appeal to mainstream voters.”

    No so fast, there.
    It’s clearly possible that X% of the people who dislike the government do so because they aren’t getting the amount of free shit they think they’re entitled to.

    1. That some how never occurs to the wokeltarians. If you don’t like this government, you must dislike all government and not just want this one changed. It is one of the dumbest things they say but they always say it.

      1. I think this is an increasingly obvious issue with polls. They ask vague questions, they get vague answers. The policy and philosophical space is very large, and so “I dislike the government currently” tells you almost nothing about the underlying reasons why.

        1. >>>obvious issue with polls

          so obvious nobody answers them anymore would be lovely

        2. No it doesn’t. The other problem is terms like “small government” are vague and relative. Suppose I am a huge believer in gun and contract rights but think drugs, obscene art should be banned? Am I for small government? Sort of. The same is true for a socialist who hates guns and thinks every form of economic activity should be regulated but loves drugs and thinks the government has no authority to regulate any form of expression no matter how obscene. Calling either one of those people “small” or “big” government supporters is meaningless. Those terms only have meaning if they are arbitarily given it by the speaker or talking about a minarchist or a full on totalitarian.

          1. 97 percent of voters support big government. 3 percent voted for Johnson.

            1. Yeah, I’m trying to remember the election afterwhich the government got smaller. Nope, I got nothin’.

            2. What was the percentage that didn’t believe Johnson was going to shrink the government?

        3. Your comment is too vague, BUCS. Language is too vague in general. Human language is more associative than hierarchically categorical.

      2. It is not logically correct to say “I don’t like this government, so I dislike all possible governments.”

        However, it is reasonable to say “I don’t like this government or the government of any other country, now or in the past, so perhaps I dislike all possible governments.”

        This is why socialists cling to the myth of “socialist Denmark”: they need it to work once, as a proof of concept.

        1. The thing is that when people don’t like “the government”, it usually turns out that they mean they have no real opinion on about 98% of the government, and very strong opinions about the other 2%. So two people who say they disapprove of “the government” are possibly disapproving of entirely different things.

      3. Changed to what? The biggest problem I, for one, see with government agencies competing with businesses is that government is too big to change when it needs to. Changing your members of Congress has no immediate effect on anything. Changing presidential administrations, or the majority party in Congress, may have some small effect–over a period of years. This is in contrast to private business, where one phone call to the right person is likely to resolve many problems even with a large company’s policies, almost guaranteed to solve problems with a really small company.

        1. you’re missing the point. if you don’t like your bank or your credit card company or your insurance company you can switch to another company. The government doesn’t let you switch. It just lets you vote for a new boss every 4 years, who doesn’t change much even when your choice wins.

      4. Essentially, yes. The same as saying “well if you don’t like the driver of this car then you must hate the car.” Nope, not exactly. Just dislike the direction it’s heading.

    2. *probable

    3. It’s more than free shit. It’s about control. Most people want to control the lives of everyone else and they think the government is the best way to do it. The “right” and “left” just want to force different behaviors. Therefore both sides are unhappy with the government because it’s not forcing the behavior they want.

      They keep voting for more government because they ignore history. They believe that the government of their dreams is just around the corner if they can get the correct people in the correct places in the next election. Then their side will have permanent control, the opposition will be forever squashed, and they will finally be able to force everyone to comply.

      1. “”Most people want to control the lives of everyone else”‘

        And we should say fuck off more often to these types.

      2. It’s more subtle than that. I believe most people would leave others alone, other than social shaming and tsk-tsking, if government weren’t there just begging to be gainfully employed in enforcing it, and if government enforcers weren’t already busy enforcing it against them. It engenders the attitude that the only way to get government off your back is to point it to somebody else’s back before that somebody else points government to your back.

        There are always people who want to force others to conform. I don’t believe most people are like that; I believe they stop at the tsk-tsk stage because they really do have better things to do with their lives.

        1. I think our outrage media cycle has a lot to do with this.

          When my kids argue and plead for me to interfere, my first question is always “Do you really want me to solve this for you?” Half the time they back off and figure it out for themselves. This is because they know that my solution will always be the one that results in them never having this argument again (i.e. “Ok, no one gets to use the tv, ever!”)

          I think most people hearing about a problem in the world think, “Wow what a bummer.” But then the media keeps at it, day in day out. Caravans stomping across the border. Weather extremes! Poor people shitting in the streets!

          Eventually, people, who would rather get on with their lives, decide “Fine, the government should get in there and fix it”. If the popular media and their activist prodders weren’t making a mountain out of every molehill, people wouldn’t be deciding that its an issue needing a federal solution.

          1. Good point. What puzzles me is the media gravitation towards more government. I understand them cooking up outrage to get more readers, but why not outrage at the problem, and at the companies or people who could solve the problem? Why constantly rail for government interference?

            I keep coming back to wanting sheep for their advertisers instead of individuals, but it doesn’t seem the full picture. They sure aren’t afraid of offending businesses.

            1. Really?
              This puzzles you?

              The media are merely government’s clergy and cryer class. Government gives them meaning and makes their cushy little lives possible. It gives them a place and makes them feel important, separated from the peasant class.

              Then, on top of that, they get to move in the same circles working as staffers.

              They’re also rather worthless, dependent and decadent people. They don’t do things for themselves – so nobody else should either.

          2. Indeed, good point.

      3. WRONG! – both sides are unhappy with the government because it’s not forcing the behavior they want

        Limited Government is Anti-Forcing behavior.

        1. Oh bullshit. Why do so many of you have such a need to find false equivalence between the republicans and democrats. The democrats are far, far, worse.

          1. Yeah….

            Remind me again of the deficit when Obama left and it now. I’ll wait..

          2. That was actually my point in response to BikeRider who made the assertion that “both sides are…” – That is simply not the case. The right pushes for “limited” government thus they are not “forcing any behavior” onto others.

            1. ” The right pushes for “limited” government thus they are not “forcing any behavior” onto others.”

              This is bullshit. The right pushes for “limited” government when they don’t control it. As soon as they DO control it, though, they suddenly remember a whole bunch of things they want the government to do… and the government gets bigger.

              1. All of that is just politician character bashing. The ideology behind it is still the same whether or not XYZ RINO does exactly the opposite or not. That’s why “Trumpists” as some call them such as myself support Trump so much; in almost all cases he has never shown RINO tendencies.

    4. +1,000,000,000

  4. This is why we need more of it.

    1. + The Philosopher Kings aka The Vanguard.

  5. Technically it’s a corporation.

    1. Leviathan, Inc.

  6. Not liking this government doesn’t mean not liking the concept of government, nor does it mean not liking government under new management.

    That poll could use some improvement.

  7. These polls make children feel unsafe. We should outlaw them.

    1. Outlaw children? Who would polish our monocles?

      1. Robots of course. I do admit, they’re not as much fun to cane.

        1. Would you prefer children robots or robot children?

          1. Whichever produces more per cost.

        2. And who would perform in PB’s pedo videos? Who would Jeffy’s illegal alien pedo friends rape?

  8. So why don’t Americans like their government?

    Because it isn’t doing enough. And that’s the problem.

    1. Because they keep messing with my Medicare.

  9. And some people still want it running every facet of their lives because profit is evil or something.

    1. Meh. If I have to choose between my life being governed by faceless bureaucrats who literally don’t care the slightest bit about me, and having my life be governed by people who have a profit motive to get in my way, I’ll take the bureaucracy.

  10. But how can this be?

    The democrat/progressive/socialist/communist party says big government is our friend.

    It not only gives us, by force, a socialist security number to track us, but arrests us, for our own good, if we smoke the deadly marijuana.

    1. If you don’t like the rape cage, then do as we say slave.

  11. Bill Weld will fix that.

  12. Reason has covered social-trust polls that shows the less trust there is in society, the more people vote for big government.

    “Getting fair treatment is an unrealizable pipe dream for suckers, I’ll just vote for the people who are unfair in my favor.”

    1. In short, if the political choices seem reduced to getting screwed or doing the screwing, people will vote to be among those doing the screwing. It’s a rational, if not morally edifying, choice.

      1. The other thing is that if you are afraid of the other side, your only hope may be to get the government to come and protect you. Libertarians have a hard time understanding that. Why would say black people or Jews support big government? Because for a large part of their existence large sections of the population have been out to get them and their only avenue of protection was from a strong central government. It is never as simple as government good or government bad as Libertarians pretend it is.

        1. That may well be the cultural memory, but there are too many examples of the government becoming a slaving/murdering machine which exceeds the evil a lynch mob might do.

          So one might argue that the enemy is *arbitrary* government – ignores real crime while perpetuating crime itself – rather than simply too little government.

          1. The enemy is a tryanical government or a government that fails to do the basic function of providing security and access to justice for all of its citizens. Just because there are dangers to government, doesn’t mean there are not equal or larger dangers outside of government.

            1. Just because there are dangers to government, doesn’t mean there are not equal or larger dangers outside of government.

              I’m glad I have the government to protect me from George Soros, Antifa, and the SJW mobs.

              1. If you were a small enough minority and the majority were violent enough, you would be glad to have the government. Black people during reconstruction were glad to have the army occupying the south for example.

                Did you get hit on the head or something? You have never been that bright but you never seemed to be this stupid.

                1. I am sure black people really enjoyed the army occupation during the Black Codes and Jim Crow.

                  1. Black codes and Jim Crow occured after the Army occupation ended. The army leaving and reconstruction ending after the 1876 Presidential election is what allowed Jim Crow to occur.

                    Do you know anything? Seriously, is there any topic you have any knowledge of?

  13. At least Comcast doesn’t have an army.

    1. Yeah but they’re gonna be overrun by SJWs and disconnect your service and stop you from getting any other service because they’ve all been taken over by SJWs and how will you feel then Mr Smarty Pants?

      1. You really can’t comprehend that society as a whole could be a bigger threat to your liberty than government can you? Its like mob violence and the use of violence and terror for political purposes never existed in your universe.

        1. Maybe one day you can get a pair of big boy pants and when you put them on realize that there’s nothing in life that’s guaranteed to go your way and when things don’t go your way you deal with it like a grown up instead of whining about the unfairness of it all.

          1. Pretty much defines the SJW movement.

          2. Christ you are a fucking moron. Life isn’t fair. Sure. But that doesn’t make something like lynching or progroms or Kristalnacht or any of the other endless examples of mob violence that occured outside of government control any better or less of a danger.

            For most of history and most of the world, the biggest danger people faced was from their neighbors not the government. That anyone could be so ignorant not to understand that, and you appear not to, boggles the mind.

            1. the biggest danger people faced was from their neighbors

              In that case, I better get them before they get me. I’m gonna go stock up on guns so I can shoot any sumbitch what thinks he can set foot on my property.

              1. That is great, except that they can do the same thing and if you are the minority, you are going to lose.

                1. That is great, except that they can do the same thing and if you are the minority, you are going to lose.

                  Nice job defeating your own argument.

                  1. My argument is that without a just government, minorities are at the mercy of the majority. So, my saying that you will lose as the minority in a conflict with the majority, supports my arguement. It doesn’t defeat it.

                    Are you just trolling or are you really this stupid? Please tell me you are trolling becuase it makes me sad and a bit scared to think that anyone could be as dense as you appear to be.

                    1. My argument is that without a just government, minorities are at the mercy of the majority

                      Your argument is that everyone is out to get me. Then when I said I’d hunker down and kill anybody that came at me you said that I’d lose because that’s what they will do.

                      This is why I would never trust you to teach logic. You can’t even follow what you’re saying never mind what I’m saying.

                    2. While I tend to agree, John, the problem is that all of the above were facilitated by the supposed “Just Governments”.

                      Show me a democracy where the government stands in the way of lynchings and pogroms, and we will be looking at a democracy where the majority does not tolerate that shit. And show me a government that allowed lynchings and pogroms, and you will be looking at a government where the majority hated the targets. The Kristallnacht was partially run by nazi paramillitary forces and nazi party leaders. The lynchings in the south were often supported by the local governments.

                      The example of the post war south is noteworthy precisely because the local governments were overridden by a non-democratic occupier (the North).

            2. John-boi, shouldn’t you be posting your drivel at MoJo or Slate?

              1. NYP, shouldn’t you be setting yourself on fire about now?

            3. Just so you know, Kristallnacht and lynchings WERE the government.

        2. Many libertarians strongly believe in natural rights which strongly contradicts the tyranny of the majority.

          1. What prevents the tyranny of the majority other than the government? What else is going to protect a small and despised minority other than government?

            1. >>>What prevents the tyranny of the majority

              i like incessant mockery

            2. There has to be an enforcement arm for the government as well as a court system, definitely. I don’t think such a government has to necessarily be a “strong” or big government though.

              1. I totally agree. It just needs to be a just and functional one.

                1. >>>just and functional

                  never gonna happen. people who want power should never find it.

            3. “What prevents the tyranny of the majority” — The Supreme Law. A sworn oath by congressmen and the president and enforced by the justice system.

              Ignore the Supreme Law or vote for candidates that policy against it and say goodbye to “inalienable individual rights”.

          2. “Many libertarians strongly believe in natural rights”

            There’s no such thing as “natural rights”. You have exactly those rights that somebody else is going to give you. One jackass in a clock tower can take away your “right to life”, without ever knowing your name. What gives you that “right to life” is that the vast majority of us don’t go up into the clock tower. Part of the reason is that many of us just don’t carry that kind of rage, and part of the reason is that when you DO do that, the rest of us start to decide that maybe it’s YOU who should be deprived of life.

            Now, should people who commit lesser offenses ALSO lose the right to life, the right to freedom, or whichever right you’re interested in at the moment? Different people have different opinions, and sometimes, er, overzealous, people find themselves in positions of power. But the question of what rights you have is STILL up to other people… if the bureaucrat(s) who think your freedom to build a deck on the back of your house is limited by your reluctance to follow building codes, but a jury of your peers sides with you, good for you. If they side with the bureaucrats, tough for you. But, no, your natural God-given property rights have approximately zero influence on the outcome, unless that jury agrees with you about them.

  14. If you want to get some possibly useful data from these dumb polls, add this:

    (Choose one) I dislike the government because it
    1. Does too much to control ____________
    2. Doesn’t do enough to control ____________

    1. I think there is a little more to that which is related to which party is in power at the time of the poll.

      A person may answer #2 when Obama was in office and answer #1 when Trump is in office.

      1. Even that is more useful than “Government, amirite?”

    2. Why don’t we see many polls with the sole, explicit purpose of figuring out what Americans actually think of government instead of this binary, “government good, government bad” crap that gives nobody any useful information?

      1. who wants a populace armed w/useful information?

      2. Personally I don’t think you’d get much useful information out of that either because there would be so many answers all over the map. I think most people don’t like government because they don’t like being told what to do but they’ll put up with being told if people they don’t like are getting it worse.

      3. Most of ’em do. But the detailed breakdowns don’t make good headlines and don’t make it to the press, they’re for internal use only.

        1. Or to put it another way… when was the last time you saw a headline “Americans have detailed and nuanced views on complicated topics, but there is some breakdown along specific demographic lines, but it’s all on a bellcurve. So let’s get into box-plots and standard deviations!”

    3. I think you and I have very different definitions of ‘possibly useful’.

      1. I’ll have you know that before I posted my comment I checked the definitions of ‘possibly’ and ‘useful’ in a number of reliable dictionaries. So if our definitions are different, yours is wrong.

  15. The U.S. government is the second-least-favorite company among millennials, the least favorite among Generation Xers, and the third-least-favorite among Baby Boomers.

    My generation embodies the libertarian moment. Welch and Gillespie can suck it.

  16. A lot of the Americans who poll as disliking government are the same sort who said “Keep government hands off my Medicare and Social Security!”

  17. With so many people disliking the government, it’s fair to wonder how a presidential candidate like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I?Vt.) will be able to appeal to mainstream voters.

    Not really. Whatever you think of socialism (democratic or otherwise), it’s different. When you’re unhappy with what you’ve been trying, sometimes “different” is all it takes.

    Wasn’t that one of the big take-aways from Trump’s election?

    1. What you forget is the USA over time is ALREADY 28% Pure Communist (by Federal Land Claims) and a good 70% Socialist in COMPLETE contradiction to the Supreme Law.

      No Sanders isn’t “different” – he’s just lobbying for MORE of the same.

  18. Government is the mother corporation.

  19. What America needs is more federal government so the powers that be can further oppress and micromanage our meaningless lives.
    Such wise and prudent people as Comrade Bernie, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and other enlightened sages have said so many times, and it would be in our best interest to listen and learn from them if we are to enjoy the benefits and joys of socialism like those lucky bastards in North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela.
    When we will ever learn.
    (Goes back to reading Das Kapital.)

    1. Ha!
      No modern socialist would read Das Kapital.
      It’s like 4,000 pages long.
      Maybe the intro to Communist Manifesto, but doubt that.
      Really think they’ll just watch a bunch of movies and TV shows.
      Maybe some cat videos on YouTube too

      1. Read?!

        They just watch AOC making dinner and spewing bartender wisdom about how she’ll make them pay…just like that ambulance chasing attorney on TV…

  20. So it’s all Trump’s fault?

    How does this rag survive?

  21. This government sucks and we need to give the government more money and power so they can not suck.

    1. If it works for schools…

  22. Business? It’s a criminal protection racket, not a business…

  23. It might have been nice if different federal agencies had been rated separately…but most of them are just too big to be useful.

    SSA comes to mind. Most people under 70 can’t convince SSA they’re disabled during the 2-24 months they *are* disabled!

  24. The U.S. isn’t a company, but it SHOULD be viewed much like a corporation. This is a much needed paradigm shift:

    The U.S. government is like a corporation that has a duty to maximize the value of its shares. In this case, the shares are citizenships and each citizen has one share only.

    The U.S. has been robbing its shareholders blind. The money is mostly embezzled by the employees and management. Insider transactions are the norm. Policy and direction is largely set for the sole benefit certain special interest benefactors, the Chamber of Commerce groups and big business which are not citizens. This is especially true on immigration and trade.

    1. The management of the U.S. is so egregious, if a corporation were run like this we may finally see white collar criminals locked away for life, or even executed.

  25. All companies are governments (Organizations that manage or control.). The state is simply a criminal form government that uses threats and violence to enforce its monopolies.

    1. Nope. It sure isn’t.

  26. The Right, “Government sucks because it diverts the rewards of my personal actions to someone else”
    The Left, “Governmental sucks because Power is Wealth and we don’t have all the ‘Power’ yet and especially not now”

  27. People hate government but the thinking is like the thinking about socialism; it’s not the institution or the concept that is the problem it’s the implementation. That’s why we go from Democrats to Republicans, rinse and repeat and nothing changes.

  28. The government is NOT a company. Not by design and not by practice.

    Proving once again that we have many, many buffoons in our citizenry.

  29. As already mentioned above, the problem is people dislike the government for completely opposite reasons.

    If we ever want to have peace and ANY shot at real liberty or freedom being restored, we must split the country up.

    We have too many people who don’t believe in even the most basic foundations the USA was founded upon… They will never be convinced, so the only way to have freedom is to NOT have those people in the country. Peaceful succession is the best way to do this.

    People hate each other so much now, I think it is actually possible that BOTH sides might agree to splitting things up finally. It is THE ONLY WAY freedom will exist here. People need to realize that there is no possible way of restoring freedom to the entire country. Only carving stuff off and allowing people to self sort politically will make it possible.


    If it doesn’t happen peacefully, then one side or the other is probably going to end up trying to put the other side in camps… And millions of people will end up getting shot in the process. So I opt for the peaceful solution.

    1. Just 5-years ago I use to have this exact same stance. I changed my mind after reading about how the Civil War developed and the ‘Confederate States’ which is exactly what you’re proposing.

      I now push for a Convention of States – Which allows a 2/3rds States majority to curb the power of the Federal Gov.

      Maps show on a State level almost all the USA is Conservative. It’s only urban cities going insane. Thanks to population based number of delegates CA itself has 53 U.S. Representative Votes in Congress.

      Actually if CA was sold to a foreign government – The USA by popular vote would start to look more USA.

      1. We’re not going to limit the power of the feds, or ANYTHING else. It is NOT going to change peacefully. If people started shooting people, and forced them at the barrel of a gun… Sure. But unless that happens, it will never change.

        We either need to restrict voting rights to people who have a tendency to vote better (which will ALSO never happen without bloodshed), OR simply split the territory up.

        People always say that it’s the big cities everywhere… Which is true. BUT losing JUST California would dramatically swing national politics… I would suggest cutting loose the entire west coast, retaining only a single sliver of land on the pacific for a port. That way we lose Cali, Oregon, and Washington… And importantly… It gives shit libs in the rest of the USA a large chunk of land to choose to move to, AND THEY WOULD.

        They would flood out of NYC, Chicago, etc because they’d know national politics were going to go too right wing for them. Conservatives and libertarians would flood out of the west coast to the rest of the country. By the time it was all said and done we’d probably shift 40-50 million people around, and the USA would actually be like America again. California would be socialist like Europe… And everybody would be happier.

  30. Libertarians want no government. You interpret and cherrypick data based on that goal. But, the government is a set of rules created by and enforced by humans. My kids didn’t want rules either. They didn’t want rules so they could get away with anything they wished. Their dad and I had to set and enforce rules anyway.

    I have to wonder what you guys want to get away with, because you trash government anytime you get the chance. However, just like children need rules to become responsible, so do whole groups of people need some kind of oversight, because otherwise they are selfish children mucking things up. That being said, humans are obviously selfish, greedy creatures, thus capitalism in which NOTHING MATTERS but how much money you can suck out of people regardless of the harm it does.

    We’ll see how things go for our selfish, greedy race as Earth biome continues to be destroyed by relentless resource extraction that destroys rather than contributes to Earth biome health. Business and government are hot to keep this up. I know, I know, scientists talk about the climate, but the non-human living community that made life possible for our species is being destroyed, and it is likely its death will kill us off before climate change does. Given what we have done to each other and this planet, we deserve it. At least you’ll get your wish: no more government.

    1. “Libertarians want no government” – Not True.

      “However, just like children need rules to become responsible, so do whole groups of people need some kind of oversight, because otherwise they are selfish children mucking things up”

      – Libertarians want adult PERSONAL JUSTICE!!! NOT parents who force what they want.

      “capitalism in which NOTHING MATTERS”

      – Capitalism is all about what MATTERS; People *freely* negotiating to meet each others needs

      “how much money you can suck out of people regardless of the harm it does”

      – That is exactly what socialism and the Democratic Party IS ALL ABOUT!

      “destroys rather than contributes”

      – E=mc2; The summation of Energy/Matter cannot be “destroyed” and the belief that molding it into something useful is “destroying” is compulsive insanity at the very least.

      Please consider where exactly your wisdom comes from and who’s feeding it and exactly how “real” it is. Libertarians aren’t anarchists. They support personal JUSTICE over “mob” voting theft/dictating. They support individual freedoms. They support our Constitution (ever read it?) Please keep your “beliefs” LOCAL city/county instead of trying to over-ride everyone’s freedom and dictate them like a obsessive parent at the federal level.

  31. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>>

  32. I used to work for Exxon, but at parties would tell people I was with the IRS so they would like me better.

  33. Pretty much everyone who answers these surveys interprets “government” as “the current president/Congress’s political ideology”. That’s why the Democrats rated “government” even lower than the Republicans.

    And if you’re comparing the government to businesses, this interpretation makes perfect sense. If you don’t like Microsoft, that doesn’t mean you oppose OS development, it means you don’t like how Microsoft is doing it right now. Asking people to rate “government” alongside a bunch of companies and then screaming with joy over the results is absurd.

  34. what makes something a company exactly? Just because you’re the biggest one doesn’t mean you’re not one.

  35. Your confusion is understandable, but this blog is called The Volokh Conspiracy.

  36. The mistake is thinking everyone votes on policy. So many simply vote on personality. Obama had a good demeanor. So even a candidate that wrote in his own book his affinity for Marxist professors and socialist redistribution won 2 terms.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.