“Growth” is meaningless.
Will sprawls do?
No. Equally meaningless.
Perchance it’s because you do not believe that the government that governs best governs least?
The desire for efficiency and order to be imposed is as old in this country as the earliest so-called progressives (even before they started calling themselves that) wanting government that takes care of things and of the people, that orders them. Government that doesn’t wait for things to average out. That ultimately does because it can. To such people implying that growth of government is bad is nonsense because government must grow to do more.
Formal gardens may contain much beauty … but they are not nature nor are they natural. They fall into chaos quickly under bad gardeners (the current Left for whom nothing remains of the old extreme Left that’s extreme to them anymore … these are among the worst ever). This country was to be more proverbially like the untamed America they knew than Versailles’ gardens.
1 Like
Why?
…
Your premise is a non sequitur.
Government would NOT be growing under my proposal.
It would actually SHRINK.
If you take two or three counties of populations of about 1,000 to 5,000 and combine them into a single county of 8,000 to 12,000 people or more you have increased the physical size of the new county.
But, you have also just eliminated one or two sets of elected officials. County Commissioners, Sheriffs, Tax Collectors, County Clerks, Property Appraisers, etc. And you have eliminated one or two sets of bureaucracy.
You now have one set of elected officials replacing two or three sets and one bureaucracy replace two or three.
Most likely the actual worker bees will be little effected. The guys who fix and pave the streets, run the street cleaner, run the water and sewage plants, they will all still have their jobs.
But the clown show at the very top will be reduced.
The result is more efficiency.
1 Like
Actually some of the worst and most abusive governments are the most local.
Try living under a homeowner’s association and you will find out where all the abusive ass hats collect.
And many small counties and municipalities are the most abusive. Speed traps are just one form of that abuse.
And I am not advocating giant ass counties that run for hundreds of miles. Just a mild reduction and consolidation.
1 Like
I don’t think combining a few small panhandle counties will cause a metropolis to suddenly spring up. 
They will still be the bright red rural areas and consolidation would not change that.
1 Like
doubtful, anytime you hear that, its nothing good
2 Likes
HOAs only exist under authority granted by the state.
Typically HOA’s are private corporations and so the relationships between the HOA and the residents is actually contractual, not governmental.
WW
Why is this an issue?
We’re fine, thanks for your concern. Bless your heart.
1 Like
The most abusive county/city in middle TN would be Davidson county (Nashville) which is the largest.
1 Like
Just as I told Rurudyne, the metric is still meaningless. Why does less money translate into the phrase “less government”?
Swing and a miss.
Why does more government and more centralized government translate into an expectation of better use of the available funds?
Think on what I call the problem with pilot programs for just a moment.
Pilot programs create the illusion of something that will succeed because of a number of conditions they generally meet, such as the difference between doing a little vs nada, or having a motivated and capable staff – sometimes specifically recruited, or having organizational flexibility, etc.
All these things conspire to create the illusion that the final program – which will likely organizationally ossify around whatever structure the pilot program generates, be staffed with people just doing a job and will have to fight against the very nature of complex systems where doing a lot doesn’t scale to have the same results that doing a little with a little can (the harder you push, when you push really hard, you get diminishing returns).
Aside: this works with EVERYTHING, even trying to march troops across a given patch of terrain or loading a cargo ship … logistical constrictions are the foil of the relatively large and the complex.
Big government is similar. Examples of small government can creates the illusionary expectation that the success they experience will scale, but it will not because complex systems just do not work that way.
So, again, why does more government and more centralized government translate into an expectation of better use of the available funds?
That’s the real question and not your version of it.
