"John D. Giorgis"

>Sorry, but this is not totally true...... the number of employees is >an 
>off way of measuring the size of the government.

Why?  It's a very good way to measure the efficiency of a company?

>As it is, the US is employing less GI's, and also is hiring *a lot* >more 
>contractors.

The numbers I quoted are civilians.  Those are the standard numbers that are 
quoted.

>Toss the contractors back into the mix, and the government still >looks as 
>big as average.....

But, what the government has done has changed quite a bit.  Its reduced its 
overhead to 3% in its biggest area of expenditure: Social Security.  That's 
not half bad.
>
>The true measure of government size is percent of GDP, and that has
>continued its steady upward climb.

Where do you get those numbers?  The historical expenditures by the Federal 
government as a fraction of GDP that I have is:

1930    3.3
1935    9.2
1940    9.8
1945    41.9
1950    15.6
1955    17.3
1960    17.8
1965    17.2
1970    19.4
1975    21.4
1980    21.7
1981    22.2
1982    23.2
1983    23.6
1984    22.3
1985    23.1
1986    22.6
1987    21.8
1988    21.5
1989    21.4
1990    22.0
1991    22.6
1992    22.5
1993    21.8
1994    21.4
1995    21.1
1996    20.7
1997    20.0
1998    19.7
1999 est        19.7
2000 est        19.4
2001 est        19.0
2002 est        18.4
2003 est        18.3
2004 est        18.1

While there are probably hard figures for '99 available and will soon be for 
'00, but this is what I have.  I'd guess that the final  percentages would 
be a bit lower, because the GDP grew a bit faster than expected.  Also, one 
sees that the post WWII peak was in '83.  And, if you go to

http://sun00781.dn.net/man/docs/fy00/historical/

you will find that the years I cut out followed the trends of the five year 
intervals...with the exception of a fast ramp up around '42.

As a % of GDP, government expenditures as a percentage of GDP fell 14% 
during Clinton's 8 years from the average of Reagan/Bush year.

So, unless every budget number I've seen is bogus, I do not see how one can 
claim that the size of the federal government in terms of the percentage of 
GDP spent is increasing is valid.


Dan'm Traeki Ring of Crystallized Knowledge.
Known for calculating, but not known for shutting up


>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

Reply via email to