I would argue with "society has clearly chosen" statement. The governments are putting more and more strict regulations in place for last decades and they often don't care what the society thinks about those. There used to be a time not long ago when one could show up in bank with a bunch of cash and it would be of no issue. I don't think that terrorism was less important back then.
Do you mean not long ago when the government budget was 1% of GDP? Nowadays it's 40-60%, in developed countries. Large levels of public spending are a choice that we have made as a society, and the spending needs to be funded somehow.
Large levels of public spending are a choice made by politicians, not society. Society does only little in regards to politics.
All we do is make a glorified X every few years, allowed to choose between the plague and cancer. All they do is wasting our money and making life worse for everyone except themselves, their peers and the rich. It's like this at least everywhere in the western world.
If the last year hasn't shown you that, and the last decades didn't either, then I don't know what to tell you.
I can't speak for elsewhere, but giant cuts to the largest public expenses (healthcare, public education, social welfare) would just be political suicide here, all but guaranteed loss in the next election.
That’s one of the concerns of groups who prefer government to be no larger than necessary: the larger it is (around 15% of Americans are directly employed), the more self-inflating it tends to become.
> That's one of the concerns of groups who prefer government to be no smaller than necessary: the smaller it is (around 15% of Americans are directly employed) the more self-deflating it tends to become.
I'm a pragmatist. The public sector seems the appropriate vehicle to deliver some things, and not for others.
> Large levels of public spending are a choice that we have made as a society
It most certainly isn't a choice we've made democratically.
Rather, it's a case of boiling the frog: a thousand tiny cuts inflicted by elected politicians over the very long term which has slowly led to the monster size leech our government has become.
> The governments are putting more and more strict regulations in place for last decades and they often don't care what the society thinks about those.
Society votes for these governments.
I know, we all would prefer to argue that some shadow cabal decides what the government does and society has nothing to do with it, but at the end of the day it still stands: We vote for these people. We get the government we deserve.
How often have politicians of all countries said and promised to enact or revoke certain policies during their election campaign and then developed amnesia, stalled until outrage dies down or simply shrug until re-election time?
People don't always get the government they deserve.
The greatest ability of democracies is error correction. Politicians lied in the election campaign? Vote for someone else next time. All current politicians lie? Be a politician. That's not easy, but it is possible. I stand by my assertion: We get the government we deserve.
The point of a system that has large financial and societal pressure at the top to conform to the wishes of specific lobbying interests is that the pressure is so large you either stop being a politician or do what they say. There is no middle ground.
It is better to say that society votes. It definitely does, but when every (and I do mean every) politician that gets in power can come right out and say that they won't do anything they promised it is not reasonable to say society voted for the governments they get. Society has governments and society votes, these two are unconnected facts because of an endemic and deeply toxic lack of accountability on the part of politicians. The lies are blatant, so much so that everyone expects them and sees them coming.
