'Small government' has a nice ring to it. After all, Americans as a bunch don't particularly care for being 'goverened'. Maybe the anti-federlists had it right. But practically speaking, would the US be, or remain, a first world country without a strong central government?
2007-05-30 03:45:29 · 9 answers · asked by Noah H 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
less gov't = less taxes.
2007-05-30 03:47:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. While SOME Americans dont like to be goverened, a lot do. If the US Government tried to "downsize" it would send us into another civil war. Mabey not with all of the blood and violence(at first), but there would be some states willing to "downsize" and others that would want to keep it like it is, or become even more powerful. If the US changed to a smaller form of government, the United States would dissolve and the greatest country in the world would no longer exist.
2007-05-30 03:54:33 · answer #2 · answered by cduncanll 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The United States achieved superpower status by having a limited central government. Once upon a time an American could start a business, create jobs and chase the American Dream without being harassed by our government. In 1900, the average American paid about 5% of their annual earnings in the form of taxes to support local, state and federal government. There was no long-term public debt.
Just 100 years later, Americans found they were being taxed 33% of their earnings and the public debt (federal, state and local) was so outrageously enormous that no one bothered to add it all up. They count the federal debt and call it quits.
America is headed on the same course as all the great societies throughout the history of mankind. It's top heavy. What happens to top heavy objects? They fall. What other questions do you have?
2007-05-30 03:54:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Right now we have a strong but ineffective federal government. Strong people do not need strong government.
I think I'd prefer to see a weak but effective government. Best of all possible worlds.
2007-05-30 03:53:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that having a strong central government and having a more populated government are the same thing. I believe that going to a direct democracy would give us both a "small" government as well as a "strong central" government.
2007-05-30 03:50:35 · answer #5 · answered by thesunwasshiningonthesea 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Less government, more freedoms and we could recover some of our lost rights. I think that we would remain strong because we are a strong people.
2007-05-30 03:50:14 · answer #6 · answered by Lori B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would America back into the Federal Republic it was meant to be.
2007-05-30 03:51:01 · answer #7 · answered by celvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only advantage I see is you would never have to worry about your taxes being audited :))
2007-05-30 03:55:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be strong and capable of doing what it's supposed to do, like protect us, and not able to do what it's not supposed to do, like redistribute our money.
Small in SCOPE.
2007-05-30 03:49:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋