Talk:Small government

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Libertarianism (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Small government is within the scope of WikiProject Libertarianism, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Libertarianism and related subjects in the Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Politics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Earlier comments[edit]

Small government currently redirects to Limited government but I don't think the two are identical. Limited government refers to a government's legal powers while Small government refers to the activities which a government undertakes. I intend to write a separate article for Small government. Biscuittin 11:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Article is a stub, so please add to it. Biscuittin 12:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Um, the core belief of conservatism is small government. it would be important to mention that. that is the main diffrence between conservatism and modern day liberalism. I have a strange feeling that fact is left out for a reason however.... (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

This has a very pro-labour bias. As a newbie to wikipedia contributing, what happens to sections where a "Citation needed" is present? Do they stay even though they can't be proven? (Burden of proof?) (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

You would do exactly what you did, which is tag the uncited passages, mention them on the talk page, and wait a bit to see if someone fixes them. Or you could fix them yourself. MutantPlatypus (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The New Zealand section isn't very helpful - just saying there are some small government reforms but not listing them or discussing any effects or further reforms. At the very least a link to the wikipedia Rogernomics page would be needed, although Sir Roger Douglas is arguing that most of his reforms have now been rolled back through social programmes. (talk) 01:56, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

It is true that conservatives say they are for small government, but they forget that the first person on earth to oversee the spending of a trillion dollars was Ronald Reagan, and he was also the first person on earth to oversee the spending of two trillion dollars. Rick Norwood (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Merger Proposal[edit]

To discuss, go here:Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Merger_proposal_:_Minarchism. --JokerXtreme (talk) 11:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Note an alternative proposal there to merge Small government and Limited government and of course mention both the libertarian and conservative varieties. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


Regarding the USA section, it is clearly POV. For example, it is true that Hamilton advocated a strong central government, but that does not imply large government. The quote from the Federalist Papers neither supports nor opposes large government, just the strength thereof, and its ability to do as necessary. (talk) 08:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

This seems to be splitting hairs. "Small government" in the US generally means state's rights, "large government" means federal authority over states. In that sense, Hamilton was clearly against "small government". Rick Norwood (talk) 13:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The article represents a skeletal attempt at even defining small government. I suggest having some imput regarding at least an outline to follow this important topic. I think professors in history, government or political science from Hillsdale College could be tapped for this task. The college also has constitutional experts ready to help....they have an online course on the constitution and bill of rights. These professors are highly regarded and would do this subject justice. Robert Vera 12/18/2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality problems in Hong Kong section[edit]

I take issue with the following sentence: While some argue that since Hong Kong was a British colony and Britain was not a free market, Hong Kong's success was not due to laissez-faire policies, it should be noted that during its colonization of Hong Kong, Britain implemented the policy of positive non-interventionism in regards to Hong Kong, which led to its economic success. Although it does note the opposing view that laissez-faire did not lead to Hong Kong's success, it presents that view as factually untrue, which it is not. It is debated and opinionated.

CarnivorousBunnytalk 02:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)