Wow. Thanks for the time to put together that response. Although I largely disagree with you, I learned a couple interesting things.
You are certainly right about the government expanding. This is a trend that I see pretty much across the board for all nations for the last several hundred years. Even where Europeans are decrying austerity measures (i.e. decreased spending) none of their governments are spending any less on any year than the previous year. In other words: they are expanding also!
But while governments expand, economic growth has declined. The greatest periods of economic growth (e.g. in the US) were during periods where the country had far less regulation than it has today. Regulation (such as breaking up standard oil into smaller corporations that *increased* profits for stakeholders) has not had the macro effect on the economy or the immediate effect it has been historically intended to address. If you look at France as a nation state with high taxes/regulation, note that it hasn't had a new company enter it's top grossing companies/corporations in the last 30 years. That means that if you risk your neck on providing something people want so badly they will pay money for it ... you will fail in France. And so no one tries, innovation stagnates, and the economy struggles to stay where it is.
While on the subject of Time Warner: the internet has flourished after being set up and relinquished by the government/military. Net neutrality may be a government-imposed improvement, but at this point it looks like a big high five for Game of Throne pirates (maybe I read the \. comments too much if that's my perception). The fire department is often seen as a sweet-spot where a little government spending can significant returns on small investments ... but now this premise is being undermined by Democrats who consider "doing more with less" as a whistle for a "race to the bottom". We could cherry pick examples for some time, but if I had to choose between a private sector resource like the internet vs. a public sector resource like fire protection I would choose internet. My privately funded home-owners insurance will build me a new house. The fire department will not build me a new house.
Your sentiment about no one really caring about scaling down the size of the government is largely true, and some of it is tied to political/voter aversion: see Barry Goldwater. But there is also a voter appetite for it: see US 2014 elections, Raegan administration, etc. Another obstacle is small-government politicians changing their opinion when they get into office. This goes clear back to Jefferson who campaigned on a nation of small farmers but doubled the size of the country without going through Congress. And now we have a president who is writing immigration policy without Congress either after saying he didn't have the authority to do so.
Anyway, thanks for lending your perspective. Your examples / data points are food for thought.
