According to the text, the absolute number of federal employees has grown substantially in the last 100 years. Based on this absolute figure alone, is it reasonable to assume that the size of government also has exploded? Why or why not? If there is a better approach to measuring this, please explain.
What will be an ideal response?
The number of employees has grown, true, but this number must be compared to the same growth in population. The number of employees has grown, but only in proportion to the growth of the population, and mostly at the state and local levels. Therefore, this probably is not a reasonable proxy for determining whether government also has grown. It would be appropriate to consider whether government has grown to serve special purposes that have accompanied the growth of the nation’s population.
You might also like to view...
The expected utility theory is most useful under all of the following conditions except
a. under conditions of uncertainty. b. when not all conditions are known. c. when results of a policy cannot be predicted. d. when the payoff is highest.
Which of the following is an example of a cabinet department?
a. Department of Agriculture b. Internal Revenue Service c. United States Postal Service d. Department of Communications
Schelling argues that a world without nuclear weapons should not be considered a safer world. What is the rationale for this argument?
a. Major wars can happen without nuclear weapons. b. Political differences in ideology are mitigated by the presence of nuclear weapons. c. Nuclear weapons create social and economic stability. d. Nuclear weapons replace conventional weapons.
Liberal theorists argue that international norms ______.
a. facilitate the self-help impulses experienced by states b. are ineffective in influencing state behavior c. create hostility and misunderstanding d. decrease the influence of anarchy