If you had to choose between big or small government what would be your choice?

[noname223]

I think here are a lot of Americans in this forum. Stereotypically they would prefer small governments. I am from Europe and at least for me the stereotype fits. I prefer big government. This dichotomy is kind of unfair isn't it? Because there are different axis. But I wanted to make the choice difficult. On the economical axis I am for big government. Due to my illness I am probaby unable to work. I will be dependent on welfare. I will probably ctb due to the poverty. Yeah sometimes I dream a universal basic income. But even this is not really an optimal solution probably.

I follow the media about politics a lot. Many expert say the future of states will be rather big than small. I also believe that. The covid crisis accelerated that phenomenon. (growing states). In my country many people got paid by the government due to the crisis. Also in the US there were checks. (but compared to my country I think way less).
I think the US is also influenced by thinkers like Ayn Randt. I really dislike many stances of her. But feel free to disagree with me.

On the other axis I am not that much for big government. I really dislike the surveillance stance. I think the internet will be way more regulated and they will spy a lot on us. China is a nightmarish example for that development. They artificial intelligence will make it very easy to track and trace all of us. I could imagine this could impact our lives in a very negative way. Yeah on this axis I am for a small government.

But if I had to choose between these two option I will go for big government. The economy is more important for me.

There is one topic I am very ambivalent. I am not sure whether I am in favor of the legalisation of drugs. If I followed my (liberal) principles I had to allow them. It is your body your choice. I also have this stance about assisted suicide, trans rights and a lot more. Though I am obviously in favor of seat bells. I think many people in this forum will disagree with my drug stance. I am not sure about it. I have met a lot of people who destroyed their lives due to drugs.

 

[narval]

oh man, i love this kind of topics but my english is too bad for long paragraphs
Other day perhaps i try to answer properly XD

 

[NSA]

Wtf does "big vs small" even mean?
Big enough to do its job effectively, small enough to stay out of my way.

 

[BeansOfRequirement]

Size doesn't matter.

 

[Symbiote]

Imagine if we had big government, they would incorporate rigid and sterile policies for the better good of society in their view. We'll have Taco Bell be the main restaurant, all music will be replaced with Vaudeville Show Tunes, cursing will affect your morality code meter, and even toilet paper will be banned in favor of the three seashells. Big government is bad.

 

[Fragile]

I really wish that small governments were viable, or even possible. The reality is that a small governing body is just a libertarian pipe dream.

The real issue is that the authoritarian, inefficient and necessarily corrupt bigger governments will always determine the fate of the smaller ones. And even in an ideal scenario where those don't exist, or are allowed to exist as a de-facto puppet, small governments will inevitably face issues that threaten their existence and can't be solved without some heavy handed authority.

 

[newave3]

The best government is that which governs least.

 

[sneezing123]

I would say a bigger government for diversity in opinion. I feel like the US in particular does not have enough representation for minority groups.

 

[Rapière]

Big government, if they share my views; small goverment, if they don't.

 

[nixdeath]

I think the issue with this question is that big government can encompass anything. There are a ton of big governments, but they are radically different. I support strong welfare and anti discrimination policies, but I don't want a police state. Some people would want a large police state but not many anti discrimination policies, or any combination of these. There are a lot of other ideas that could or could not be in a government, so it really depends.

 

[obafgkm]

Isn't universal basic income actually a small government thing? But it is tested mainly in big government countries because it's often seen as welfare which is big government.

Many countries already provide free or subsidized education, housing, health services, roads... Isn't it only a question of whether it is better, or more efficient, for governments to provide these services directly as "free", or give people a sum of cash so that they can spending more on things they need more?

 

[sserafim]

I would choose no government at all. Anarchy ftw

 

[Edpal247]

I want 1 world government - yes, 1 world order. Fewer squabbles, possibly. Dismantle all the nukes and use for cheap energy for the masses.
Just a pipe dream of mine

 

[DarkRange55]

small gov needs small worlds, so it may work in the asteroid belt

 

[DarkRange55]

My prediction for the future would be: Larger, until we colonize space or become pets of AI, or change so much we are no longer human. Or nuke ourselves back to the stone age.

Current gpvs are geographic monopolies.
Monopolies grow by rewarding inefficiencies, and lack internal means to clean up inefficiencies.

 

[UnluckyBastard]

I do not put faith in any centralized institution, regardless of intent.

 

[DarkRange55]

small gov needs small worlds, so it may work in the asteroid belt

Imprecision. "Needs" should be "benefits from", and the emphasis should be on worlds (plural) rather than on small.
Best if worlds are distinct enough to avoid a dominating all-world government, but close enough to be competitors.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Big government if I agree with the people in charge, small government if I don't.

 

[DarkRange55]

Isn't universal basic income actually a small government thing? But it is tested mainly in big government countries because it's often seen as welfare which is big government.

Many countries already provide free or subsidized education, housing, health services, roads... Isn't it only a question of whether it is better, or more efficient, for governments to provide these services directly as "free", or give people a sum of cash so that they can spending more on things they need more?

Take this with a grain of salt, but my understanding is:

Vouchers /cash provide choice whereas providing some level of basic services like education and health care are supported by government (and taxes). A philosophy of government and individual's role in our lives.

Clearly education and health and shelter/food, jobs are critical to most people's well/being.

As for big or small, that might depend more on your political and economic philosophy, and point of view