I think greed is good for society in the same way that nuclear reactions bring lots of energy. That is to say, it does, but left unchecked it brings destruction.
Because engineering is all about making choices. Making a boolean 1 bit would be space efficient. However, memory is being read at least 1 byte at a time. If you want 1 bit of that byte, that's an extra instruction.
So storing a boolean in one byte is more speed efficient!
(In C you can store a boolean in one bit. If, for example, you need to store a great number of booleans and memory size is more important than speed. )
Some quick googling tells me the US gov spends between 35 and 40% of the US GDP. Also, the article says 'relatively'. Compared to other nations, especially other developed nations, the US government can definitely be called 'relatively small'.
> The first has a broad range of valid answers, the second is something that everyone ignored until DOGE
They cared plenty before, and there's no real indication to me of a difference with DOGE.
Both pre- and post-DOGE, it's all about weird anecdotes like "this wrench cost $20,000! This toilet seat cost $600!"[0], which, even at their current rate of work, would only amount to a rounding error compared to the $2 trillion they talk about cutting.
Which is probably for the best, because the $2 trillion goal — about the combined total of the entire US social security system plus all military pensions — is so large that "success" will cause a huge recession.
That is the spending, then there'll be a bump up beyond the official figures because of regulation (ie, control of companies that would turn up in categories other than direct government spending). That gets it to most of the economy in my mind.
And things like all the private businesses servicing government workers. Eg, in Washington - sure there'd be a lot there that isn't officially government spending but the ostensibly private infrastructure investment and consumption but really it is all supporting the operation of government.
Once the official stats say the government has reached 40% of the economy, the practical influence is going to be a bit larger again. I'm still happy to say >50%.
> Compared to other nations, especially other developed nations...
I don't think the difference can be defended as important. The US is running a large modern mixed economy. It hasn't been a small-government country since the 70s; at best.
That isn't a compelling case to say 40% of the economy is a small government. The ratio of government spending to private is getting pretty close to 1:1. I'd accept that it isn't "big" in the sense that some places manage to spend even more in % terms, but to call that behemoth "small" is a bridge too far. It is standard sized. Small governments don't control that much of the market.
EDIT And if you want to lean on the "relatively small", in the sense the article is using it makes sense to compare the sizes related to each other, in which case the US government is much larger than every other contender except China. Relative to the German or French government, the US government is enormous. It is a corruption honeypot.
Nobody wants to shut down all the farming, just reduce it. For example, the Netherlands produces 250% of its own meat consumption. Since it's subsidized, the net financial gain is very low. You could say reducing the production to 125/150% of consumption would leave enough for local consumption plus a little export in good times or a buffer in bad times.
Unfortunately, big agricultural companies hired a marketing company to start a political party which claims to be pro local/small farmers, but is actually just pro big agriculture.
Very interesting indeed. Here in the Netherlands, we've had ID requirements for voting since forever. And even though we don't vote on Sundays (I think it's always a working day), our turnout rate is similar (slightly higher even) compared to Germany. I guess there's more at play here.
Here in AU, there's no ID required, and we always vote on Saturdays (though pre-poll stations are open most days of the week, and there's a bunch of other exceptions for the NT due to remoteness).
Fair question! Carbon had an atomic weight of ~12, oxygen has an atomic weight of ~16. So carbon is responsible for 12/44 part of the weight of CO2. If we assume plastic to be 80% carbon, then 1kg of plastic would produce (0,8*44)/12~= 2,9 kg of plastic.
So probably plastic is less than 80% plastic :). But then number makes sense, similarly for diesel.
But every country on Earth can say the same, right? Everybody is 'only responsible for a fraction of the total polution'.
It's a tragedy of the commons kind of situation.
"Be smart and" don't get an expensive ring! Spend that money on your honeymoon, wedding, just save it, or donate it to a charity. Doing anything else makes more sense really.
reply