Is government really "too big"?

[kentuck]

The argument against "big government" is usually directed toward the huge debt and deficit we have accumulated. However, that is a false premise.

Granted, some government may be too big but some government is too small, it could be argued.

The reason we have the huge debt and deficits is because of the unequal distribution of wealth and the failure of many at the top to pay any semblance of a fair share of taxes.

When it comes to the defense industry and weapons contractors and corporate welfare, including corporate farmers, then government is too big. But when it comes to spending money on infrastructure, on our roads and bridges, and on our people, in the form of health insurance and job training, etc, then government is too small.

Most of the industrialized world spend more on their citizens, from healthcare to unemployment insurance to caring for newborns, than does the United States. So we are not a big spending government in that respect.

"Big government" has become a mantra of the Republican Party and the Tea Party and it is a false charge. The part of government they support is too big and nobody wants to pay for it. However, the part of government we need is too small, and they do not want to pay for that either.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. The part that persecutes people is too big; the part that helps people is too small.

[closeupready]

5. Yes! This x 1000. Defense should be halved,

the safety net should be doubled. For starters.

[politichew]

2. Not big enough. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best stage, is but a necessary

Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best stage, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

[Marrah_G]

4. Parts of it are

The parts that SHOULD be bigger are not.

[L0oniX]

6. The military part is way too big!

[haele]

7. The more diverse a population is, the larger government should be.

The problem with the US is that populations are in pockets of dense clusters of diversity, and large swathes of small and homogeneous clusters.

If you live in one of those small homogeneous clusters, your experience is that pretty much everyone around you thinks and acts the same as you do - so you would prefer - and probably think you need - a smaller government. You aren't thinking the big picture, because despite TV and the Internet (and the interstate highways, and utilities grids, etc), your life and job is centered in your immediate community, and you don't experience anything different unless something happens to the outside world that affects infrastructure.

Whereas, in the diversity pockets, you can travel 5 minutes and be in a completely different culture with different experiences and levels of activity, and you're required to share your infrastructure with a huge number of people who don't act, think, work, or play the same way you do. Bigger government allows all these different cultures to use a common infrastructure and interact with each other fairly and relatively peacefully.

Haele

[Johonny]

8. There is no evidence that a true difference in spending between parties exist

there is however a large difference in what they want to spend the money on, and how they generate revenue.

When you realize that you stop voting Republican.

[SomethingFishy]

9. It's not to big.. It's not accountable...

The amount of waste in the government is beyond imagination. Think of the amount we spend developing weapons we don't need or don't use. Think 9 billion dollars disappearing in Iraq with no questions and no investigation..

We as citizens are being systematically robbed of our tax dollars. Half the time we don't even know where the money goes. And when we do find out where it goes it ends up being subsidies, bailouts, tax breaks, and contracts for companies known for fucking us over. Then god forbid someone has the nerve to protest our money being stolen, if that happens we send out the cops in riot gear to tell the populace to just, as Nancy Pelosi so succinctly put it, to Embrace The Suck.