Are the days of small government gone forever?

Question

Neither of the big parties seem to be concerned with the size of government. The legacy of the great society is a mess (thanks a lot LBJ) and there is more pork today then ever. What is it going to take to actually reign in spending and have government do only what government is needed to do?

Answer 1

Yes, the days of small government are going away and it is sad. In 1900, the government spend only 7% of the GDP. By 1970, it's spending as a percent of the GDP had tripled. And it's only going up. Ever hear obout the "Bridge to Nowhere"? It is as tall as the Brooklyn bridge, and almost as long as the golden gate bridge. Guess where it is? Some god-forsaken town in the middle of Alaska. Connecting two islands that already had ferry service running between them. Both J.D. Rockefeller and Ken Lay (from Enron) have recieved farm subsidies, and the Bureau of Agriculture is inn a similar mess; in 1900 there were 3,000 bureaucrats in the department to regulate six million farms. Now, the amount of bureaucrats has increased over 30 fold to 100,000 while the number of farms have decreased to 2 million.

Amtrak is a mess, too. That firm has lost, on average, almost $1 billion per year and it's trains are imfamously late.

General Pork is hideous, also. The website citizens against government waste estimate that there are 2,822 pork projects running in the military. The following is just a sample from the website:

"$13,500,000 added by the House for the International Fund for Ireland (IFI), which has released a five-year strategy focusing on grassroots reconciliation and cross-community projects such as: the construction of Creggan Community Café and Catering Ltd., the Newcastle YMCA, the Donegal Town Waterbus, the Leitrim Food Center of Excellence, the Chef Development Program, and funding toward the World Toilet Summit. Could there be a better example of the government flushing away your money?"

Government is certainly getting bigger. And I really doubt that the Rupublicans or Democrats will really be willing to do anything about it. After all, it's their pork. The best solution I can see are anti-government waste third parties, catering directly to the fact that so much money is wasted. But I dobt that will really happen.

Answer 2

To limit government spending takes a lot of discipline, some accounting controlls, bipartisan agreement that it's the right thing to do.

There are many factors that lead politicians, liberal and conservative, to increase the budget rather than shrink it. When you spend money you create allies, you get favors in return. If you can do it while hiding or downplaying the effects of deficit spending, it is always in your best interest as a politician to support increased spending rather than fiscal conservatism.

There is some mileage to talking about a balanced budget, saving for the sake of future generations, etc., but far less mileage than anyone gets from a new highway project, a new weapons system, more money for a social program.

I don't think politicians will ever change their stripes and favor small government, not unless there is a fundamental change in how their efforts are perceived and rewarded. If any change is possible it will be incremental -- the economy grows and tax revenues increase, without a rush to spend the surplus money. Poverty and social problems like crime get better so we don't have to spend as much on law enforcement, and so on. Nobody has the spine or the political influence to cut out spending to people who already expect it. But there is a small chance we can simply grow out of this problem.

Term limits make things worse, incidentally. That puts all the power in the hadns of lobbyists, staffers, and interest groups that do not have term limits. LIne item vetoes just give the President power to implement his own pork rather than accepting Congressional pork. We really need a fundamental change in the way that federal budgets are reported, analyzed, and understood by the public.

Answer 3

We blame wal mart for the death of small business. We blame the U.S. government for the death of small governments. About a hundred years ago we were riding horses. About three hundred we were Making a country out of nothing. 1400s this country was just being discovered. Progress was slow. Then it sped up. With each new creation we gain speed. Technology is growing so fast the items being released on monday are obsolete by friday. The globe is shrinking as governments grow. Populations growing expotentially. More people equal more brains which equals more innovation and more prejudice. Economically, the U.S. knows there shouldn't be one government for the entire world. Politically, we can't stand by and watch innocents being killed. We may be fighting for oil or a foot hold, but people are sick of fighting for fuel and alternatives "will" be found. Small governments are leaving because population's keep growing and the planet is staying the same size. It will burn, we will leave unwillingly, and the earth will heal itself and everything will start over. Yes the days of small government are gone forever.

Answer 4

Small size Government is as mythical as Santa Claus and the unicorn.

It really should be responsible government we are after.
Responsible for things like:

1. Balancing the budget
2. Helping to improve the pathetic condition of the elementary
education. Math, Reading etc.
3. Helping to provide decent heath care for all.
4. Helping to provide for dignified social security for the elderly.

What is the meaning of being the richest nation on earth if millions of people working for small companies and some large companies like Wal Mart do not have any or adequate heath care coverage. Many in the Health care industry itself (nurses aids,elder care personnel) DO NOT HAVE health insurance.

I know people point to many failed systems and say that in the US technology and cure is available on demand. But it's only hogwash. WE CAN AND MUST DO BETTER!!!!

Answer 5

The recession interior the united kingdom has been brought about via the reality that our entire financial equipment for the final 20 years has been in accordance with human beings borrowing money. that's no longer a wholesome thank you to run an prolonged-term financial plan via fact faster or later the money owed must be paid back. Or they circulate undesirable, which leads to losses all around. consistent with threat if the grasping agencies and banks weren't continuously bombarding those with can provide of easy credit, less costly loans and mortgages and as a replace we've been inspired to keep for what we desire as a replace of sticking it on the tab and figuring out to purchase it later (with interest), and fools weren't looking forward to to stay a rock celebrity's way of existence on a automobile mechanic's salary, then the financial equipment must be in a greater proper shape. as that's we are going to ought to climate the hurricane and face the bankruptcies.

Answer 6

Imagine a balloon which keeps getting larger until it bursts. Once a government program is created, it is damn near impossible to get rid of it. The answer, do nothing and wait for it to implode, or set limits to programs, have a review board to oversee. I don't see it working. At some point the government will be too big to function, it won't be pretty, but equilibrium will be achieved.

Answer 7

Big government doesn't come from the government. It comes from people wanting someone to 'take care' of everything for them, and letting the government do that. The problem with government programs is not that they are expensive or big, but that they are not operated by local people under local control who know what is really needed in a community. If we want less government, we have to take care of ourselves and our places without asking the government for handouts and paved roads and bicycle paths to every little rabbit hole and squirrel den in the country. If we want less intrusion by law enforcement, then we have to behave. If we want cheaper gas, we have to stop wasting it and buying more of it.
Collapse usually leads to smaller government intrusion anyway. Keep your powder dry and your neighbors close.

Answer 8

kennyh85 wrote:
"When enough people acually realize that voting does do something. The only reason that *thing* is in office now is because not enough of the right people voted, twice. They can market candidates and move the stupid to vote, but the smart have to get there first. I certainly hope we're not a dying breed.
All it takes for the forces of evil to win is for enough good people to do nothing (don't remember who said that, but thats not mine)."

That's not true. Enough of the right people voted or would have voted that thing out of office. The election was stolen. Look at this site to find out the truth. http://www.gregpalast.com/index.php?tag=theft-of-presidency

Answer 9

TERM LIMITS! We've got career politicians who care so much more about their careers than the people they represent. These people aren't necessarily good business people either, and simply do not hesitate before blowing our tax dollars. Our system, sadly is near its breaking point. Politicians are corrupt on both sides of the aisle, and sold the people of this country out in the early 70's. "We only get what we demand, and if we want hell, then hell is what we'll have." That quote by Jack Johnson.

Answer 10

When enough people acually realize that voting does do something. The only reason that *thing* is in office now is because not enough of the right people voted, twice. They can market candidates and move the stupid to vote, but the smart have to get there first. I certainly hope we're not a dying breed.
All it takes for the forces of evil to win is for enough good people to do nothing (don't remember who said that, but thats not mine).