Theres obviously a place for central and strong governance as there are no countries in the world who have thrived without it. There is also a place for a market economy as the only countries in the world whom have thrived have done so with this economic system. The main role of the government IMO is to provide stability, provide goods and services which the market would not otherwise provide, I.E. be rational in an irrational society.

The net positive gain for having a government with taxation etc in the western world is always higher than the cost of not having one at all. The level of taxation ought to be set at a level which enables the government to perform its functions. The current governments probably could go on auto-pilot for a decade and people wouldn't notice. They have legislated 99% of the issues which are important to 95% of people when applicable. I suspect the best thing which could be done in terms of governence is a clean sweep and a restart to simplify the entire system.

Theres obviously a place for central and strong governance as there are no countries in the world who have thrived without it. There is also a place for a market economy as the only countries in the world whom have thrived have done so with this economic system. The main role of the government IMO is to provide stability, provide goods and services which the market would not otherwise provide, I.E. be rational in an irrational society.

The net positive gain for having a government with taxation etc in the western world is always higher than the cost of not having one at all. The level of taxation ought to be set at a level which enables the government to perform its functions. The current governments probably could go on auto-pilot for a decade and people wouldn't notice. They have legislated 99% of the issues which are important to 95% of people when applicable. I suspect the best thing which could be done in terms of governence is a clean sweep and a restart to simplify the entire system.

growing debt? no that was the retards in congress spending to much and refusing to reform entilements just because bush was in office.

shrinking middle class? theres no such thing as a middle class, theres the have ; have nots; and busness owners. Middle class is just a politcal ploy that changes week to week as to whom is in it.

no country that thrived without a strong central government? Have you forgotten about the US before the 1900s? Provide Goods and services that the market doesn't? Like what? Building roads? The states can take care of that. Society is irrational? really?

None. Insert X country without strong government here that thrives in the modern world. The closest thing to a free market economy is about the closest thing to economic collapse you can find anywhere, look to Africa.

State vs Federal = irrelevant. The Federal is a central government one step removed from a state central government.

Rational things governments do that people cannot:

1. Impartial courts.

2. Impartial policing.

3. Vaccines, health education etc.

4. Projects where the payoff is >5 years down the road, I.E big dams, roads, railway etc.

5. etc

States vs feds irrelavant? lol sure thats why this country has gone down the tube after the states lost all their power in the federal gov.

1 impartial courts? lol yeah like that judge that made up a stupid test to determine if national day of prayer should exist.

2 impartial policling? you mean like the sec going after goldman but john paulson hasn't been arrested or charged?

3 vaccines are made by the private sector always have been. in most places health care is private sector. The education system has been pretty abhorrent the last 30 yrs or so. maybe the feds should get out.

4 Locals can decide if those projects are worth while and they can pay for them. You remember the bridge to no where?

1 - WRONG!  Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society.

2 - Government functions?  According to who?

3 -

4 - Again, according to who?

I agree with a clean sweep. The authoritarian/corporatists and the cowards who refuse to stand up to them have become entrenched in government at all levels.

Which retards had the majority and what retard signed the spending bills (and tax cuts) that increased the national debt by seven trillion dollars??

I'll give you a clue: They weren't liberal.

1. revenue went up after the tax cuts not sure why you think that make more of a deficit.

2.

dems took control of congress in 06. in three yrs they added more to the spending than the repubs had in six. Dems were the ones to block SS reform and now SS is in the red. so you can say what ever you want abou the repubs but the dems have been far worse. and for your knoweldge the repubs are pretty liberal.

Source on your chart?

Where did (most of) the seven trillion in debt that Bush racked up come from?

The "Dems" who took control in 06 were easily bought off by lobbyists. (cheap fucking whores)