2007-12-09 07:12:19 · 15 answers · asked by Edge Caliber 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
No.
2007-12-09 07:14:18 · answer #1 · answered by Andy U 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not sure about the 50% cause how many would be out of work and have pertinent jobs. I think I read where the IRS cost over 60% of what they collect, is that true? If so think of all that money. Anyway I don't know how it could be done. I know they closed military bases and cut it, but is that the answer? that happened before and not good results. Wonder where they could cut corners. take care.
2007-12-09 18:30:50 · answer #2 · answered by R J 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not necessarily a bad thing - it all depends on which areas of government are shrunk. I think 50% is awfully drastic and a 25% reduction would be more feasible without impacting the more important areas of government.
2007-12-09 15:19:30 · answer #3 · answered by mollyflan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is if from certain parts of the government (border patrol, secret service, defense, etc). Some parts of the government should be shrunk much more that 50% (ie Dept of Ed, IRS, H&HS, etc)
2007-12-09 18:25:36 · answer #4 · answered by Constitutional Watchdog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, especially if my tax bill shrinks by 50%.
2007-12-09 15:14:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Only if you want organized criminals and terrorists free to do what ever they want, want to breathe dirty air, want to drink foul water, don't care if the airlines are flying safe planes, and don't care if you grandmother starves because she no longer gets her social security check.
People want all the safeguards the government offers without paying for them. Ain't no free lunch kids. We all pay our share, and reap the benefits. Life is like that.
2007-12-09 15:21:05 · answer #6 · answered by marci knows best 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It seems their brains have already been shrunk so I don't see the problem with catching their bodies up.
Imagine, the president would be 3 inches tall if he was shrunk to match his iq.
2007-12-09 15:16:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends if you start out with at least 200% more to begin with!
2007-12-09 15:14:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well most of our founding fathers thought so
they believed in a minimalist government
but today it's just not possible too many people needing government assistance
and we defiantly need to enlarge our justice system
2007-12-09 15:16:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
nope just keep the police, military and other key services strong. Cut the other BS
2007-12-09 15:16:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not if you shrink the 'right parts'.
And therein lies the rub of entrenched interests.
2007-12-09 15:15:36 · answer #11 · answered by DAR 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋