Non war times pre 1913, federal spending was such a low percent of gdp as to barely be noticeable, generally far below 5%. The 15%+ I pay now is painful, 2% would barely be noticed. Especially in the context I have to pay (state) taxes on all the new federally required stuff like air bags and emissions controls.
So federal spending has been "out of control" for over 100 years in your view?
I guess I don't really think we can have fundamentally similar views on what it means to be "in control" of something, because I don't think something can be "out of control" for 100 years.
But, if you want to go back to pre-1913 levels of federal spending, you must mean to significantly cut or eliminate all federal entitlements?
If that is your view, do you think you're representative of others that would argue that federal spending is "out of control"? Do you think it would be fair of me to assume that most people who think federal spending is "out of control" also want to significantly cut or eliminate social security/medicare/medicaid? Or do you think your views are an outlier among those that think federal spending is "out of control"?
People who think spending had been out of control for 50 years, your original question, generally are against the 30s era expansion of federal government which is the genesis of the modern federal spending expansion.
To be fair, though, my original question was in response to someone saying that "many people who would say spending is out of control now, would say it was out of control in the 1970s".
I guess I'd love to get some kind of intuitive sense for what fraction of people who think spending is out of control _today_, would think it was out of control in the 1970s, and what fraction would think it was out of control in the 1930s.
Honestly, my naive my assumption is the number of people who would think spending has been out of control since the 1930s, and want to totally eliminate things like social security and medicare completely is small enough to be politically ignored. I could be wrong about that, though (I get the feeling that _most_ of the political actors who are aiming for this goal have decided to lie about their intentions, because it's such a politically toxic position to take today; but that makes it hard for me to get a sense of how many of those actors there are).
But, then I'd assume that the number that have thought it "out of control" since the 1970s would be a higher fraction (I would've guessed maybe...30% or 40% of the people who think it's out of control today). I would've assumed that a decent chunk of people thinking spending is out of control today, would've at least looked back favorably on the Clinton era deficit elimination and mild surpluses.
Anyway, I guess my point is, I have no idea how many people would hold to each of these positions, but I'm quite curious about each since it seems like my naive assumptions don't really line up well with how you think the distribution would be. And since you hold those beliefs, I think you probably have a better intuition about those belief distributions.
Sure, and to return to that the first thing we would need to do is shut down Medicare and Social Security and also sell off most US military equipment for scrap.
