3 ms·
>who cares, on the face of it, what size the government is? Until the size stops correlating with the amount of resources that must be taken from people everyb
by throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>who cares, on the face of it, what size the government is?
Until the size stops correlating with the amount of resources that must be taken from people everybody with anything to their name cares.
- clairity 6y agobut again, your concern then is efficiency, so let's look at efficiency metrics directly rather than the poor proxy that size is. that also neatly sidesteps the manipulative use of "big government" as a tool by politicians to deploy power against the common interest.
- edbob 6y agoYou make a valid point when considering the total size of governments at all levels. However, I think what people most want to avoid is specifically an excessively large government at the federal and (to a much lesser degree) state levels. This is a worthy goal. This is not unrelated to efficiency: the legendary inefficiency of the federal government is correlated with its bloat and unaccountability, problems which are much easier to address at the state and local levels (and you can move away from the failures).
- clairity 6y agopower will always try to overflow its limits, no matter the size. the fed has a fairly limited mandate via the constitution, but federal politicians of all stripes are constantly grubbing for power, which is where the inefficiencies largely come from. the answer is not to focus on size, but how and why it's overflowing via power grabs. focusing on size leads to the wrong conclusions and the wrong responses. that's the point.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]