From: jkreznar@ininx.com (John E. Kreznar)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 03:46:05 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Shrinking government
In-Reply-To: <9412051130.1.17207@cup.portal.com>
Message-ID: <9412061145.AA15280@ininx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

H. Keith Henson writes

> It may be that a general cutting down on the powers of the Federal
> Government is in order.

How could you doubt it?

> This has pros and cons,

Name a con.

> and support (in some areas) even from the RR.

That's ok.  Without a government to wield, they would be ignorable.

> How *does* one shrink the unshrinkable?  Tax revolts (in the 
> form of massive political pressure) seem to come about when the tax 
> rates get as high as they are now.

Tax revolts do no good.  Taxes are the _result_, not the cause.

The cause of big government is popular gratuitous acceptance of
government favor.

If you want to shrink government, you've got to begin by changing the
minds of a hundred million of your neighbors who think it's civilized to
take a government job or contract, accept social security, apply for an
SBA loan or FEMA assistance, and on down the list.

I know a tax revolter who held an anti-tax rally on a tax-funded picnic
ground without even noticing or acknowledging the inconsistency.

This is why it's unshrinkable.  We have met the enemy, and he is us.

	John E. Kreznar		| Relations among people to be by
	jkreznar@ininx.com	| mutual consent, or not at all.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLuRNEsDhz44ugybJAQHpIgP/a3fFhRrub8X3KQu5EHYy94+nsfOu788b
Mv2yXisQSEBjUR41IIU7ieTzq5B9nPHY3D2wWJ70EQmZOJ2bWQl1HMosoRSwd3eL
oNZQvu+DPsvZFAge/BQyFjCDaQCme9Xm+rXC8psqGmGT9avQE7ti+OSEnFQ+lSJj
FYv/Lj69vlM=
=4m98
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----