Yeah, because none of the millions of unemployed people would ever want to work for the federal government unless we pay them amazing benefits and astronomical salaries. You know, to stay "competitive" with the free market and to be "fair."

Thank goodness the government doesn't have to take into account pesky things like supply and demand when they can simply pass laws stating that people must buy their "services" under threat of violence.

"Let's see, we have a great government "services" package that we're offering this year... or, of course, you can simply take this tax refund check in the amount of $30,000-$50,000 and spend it on whatever you'd like. But we really are quite efficient at determining your needs for you in advance."

Hmmm, let me think about that one...

"If America doesn't manage to begin cutting its government in the near future, we should focus our efforts on changing the country's name. That way we can still speak of things like "the American spirit" and "the American dream" with some degree of intellectual clarity." Justin Katz

The end of an empire? Cutting one's government. Maybe you should change your hyper view of American power. Oh, we cut only SOME things. Can you clarify?

As long as the Federal government can easily use unlimited debt to fund its activities, we won't be able to prevent things like this. Naturally, then, there are only two ways this can end. The first is insolvency, if the good people of China currently fueling this binge run out of money, patience, good will, or sanity. Obviously not a good option.

The second is devolution; passing the administration (and funding, after a time) of every possible federal program down to the states. I know giving more power to the state is an unpopular idea here, but most states aren't this incompetent. Ultimately, the country is becoming ungovernable; the faster we adapt the better.

"Yeah, because none of the millions of unemployed people would ever want to work for the federal government unless we pay them amazing benefits and astronomical salaries. You know, to stay "competitive" with the free market and to be "fair.""

[in a Wally Cleaver tone] Gee, Dan, is that why employee turn-over so low in the federal government?

I'm sorry, David S, are you openly advocating maintaining an "American Empire"? Usually people have to resort to supporting imperial activities like foreign interventionism, base-building, nation-building, and military expansion while simultaneously denying that an American empire exists so as not to seem hypocritical, belligerent, or overly-expansionist. You are actually advocating policies to openly maintain an empire over other countries? I just want to be clear.

I personally have zero interest in maintaining an empire. I get virtually no benefit out of it, it costs an arm and a leg, and all empires end the same way - in ruin. No empire in the history of mankind has survived, I don't think we'll be the first.

I can't speak for Justin or anyone else, but I don't draw distinctions here. We need to cut government. Every part of it. Across the board. The spending has gotten completely out of control. We keep coming up with more programs and increasing funding, and we never cut an ounce. That old economic truism comes to mind: if something cannot go on forever, it will stop. When was the last time you remember a federal program or agency being cut?

I apologize, David S, upon rereading your post, I realize that I might have misread what you were trying to say, although I am still not quite sure.

If what you are advocating is curtailing our militaristic empire overseas, then I am fully behind that!