2007-11-11 00:56:16 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Big or small is not the decisive factor in measuring the limitations on freedom by government. Some oppressive dictatorships have very small governments, relatively speaking, because they provide absolutely no government services except for military services, which are used to suppress opposition.
The functions being performed by the government and how those functions are performed are more applicable to a determination of their effects on freedom in any country.
2007-11-11 01:32:51 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certainly a more intrusive government which massively eavedrops means less freedom for Americans. It doesn't need to be any larger to do this; it just needs more laws from a supine congress.
"Definition Changing For People's Privacy" http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071111/ap_on_go_ot/terrorist_surveillance;_ylt=Avrd1hLv1aUciQEj1O5zFd.s0NUE
2007-11-11 09:05:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only under a present type of Pluto theocracy that Bush embraces.
While our heavily entrenched corporate elites and affluent decision-makers cut their own taxes, reduce spending on social programs, and lavish insane amounts of the working poor's and middle class's tax money on a military which exists to protect and expand their pecuniary interests, they offer the weakest members of our society, our homeless people, a quality of life that would repulse a sewer rat.
Thanks to the pathological greed unleashed and rewarded by Capitalism, America has forged a Faustian Pact. It is inevitable that Mephistopheles will come to collect his due. Or perhaps he already has.
2007-11-11 09:03:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, but the Constitution sets limited government power.
2007-11-11 08:59:55 · answer #4 · answered by Ducks 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely. We are now free to buy toys that poison our children and be put in the hospital with e-coli from a massive food contamination.
I myself, would be glad to be restricted to wholesome food and safe consumer products by a fully staffed consumer product safety agency and a fully functioning USDA. - Big Government, in other words.
2007-11-11 09:04:45 · answer #5 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, when the Republicans set up the new Homeland Security agency we got just that...
2007-11-11 09:35:33 · answer #6 · answered by alphabetsoup2 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unequivocally Yes.
2007-11-11 08:59:35 · answer #7 · answered by Mother 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Almost always. The exception being agencies that protect us like DoD, DoJ, CIA, FBI, etc. Shutting these down or reducing them cedes power to domestic and foreign criminals and reduces our freedom.
2007-11-11 09:07:46 · answer #8 · answered by Dan 4 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Not necessarily. Less money for sure though.
2007-11-11 09:02:33 · answer #9 · answered by bootedbylibsx2 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes it does. There will be a department and than you have to answer to them. Taxes= IRS, Driving=DMV
2007-11-11 09:02:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋