Introduction


I have decided to write my paper on smaller government versus bigger government. The question is are we better off with lots of government programs with higher taxes to pay for them or with smaller government with lower taxes? With smaller government there would be fewer programs with fewer government employees. The tasks of these government programs would be taken up by the private sector.


Is Social Security worth saving? Would we be better off by privatizing Social Security? Or do Americans need the security of knowing if they are unable to save for retirement on their own; the federal government will do it for them. I will compare private markets with Social Security to see where the better returns are.


Some people would like to see a national healthcare program for everyone. They feel that would be the answer to our healthcare crises. By healthcare crises I mean rising out of control healthcare cost and so many Americans being uninsured. To determine whether or not a national healthcare program would be a viable solution I analyzed two national healthcare plans that have been in existence since 1965, Medicaid for the poor and Medicare for the elderly. I see no reason to expect different results as far as the quantity and quality of service from a national healthcare plan for everyone as we are currently getting from Medicaid and Medicare. Therefore I will use these two federally sponsored programs as a model for a future national healthcare program for all Americans.


One of the perks of small government is less regulation. Let the American people make more decisions for themselves. However, are government regulations all that bad? I guess it depends on how you want to look at it. Fewer regulations mean more freedom for individuals but perhaps many of the regulations on...