You have too much Government when you can investigate a dead fish in Texas
I THINK we’d all agree (OK, you anarchists at the back can shut up) that we do in fact need to have some government. Making sure there’s only one Army seems like a good idea, we need some method of working out who empties the bins. So some ruling structure that deals with these things for us seems like a decent enough idea.
But there are also those who think that it’s possible to have too much government. I’m among them but I offer you this as an example:
“We’re more conscientious in looking for this now than we were five or six years ago,” said Kurt Kelley, a game warden with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department who patrols rural Wood County east of Dallas and has investigated about 30 tournament fraud cases in his nearly 13 years with the agency, including one that spanned nearly two years involving a contestant who submitted a dead fish.
Now yes, people cheating at a fishing competition is indeed cheating. Given that these US things often have cash prizes it’s also quite possibly fraud. But I put it to you that when the State (that is, the State of Texas and also “the state” as in government) employs someone to investigate for two years the dastardly case of a dead fish being submitted in such a contest then, you know, perhaps, maybe, all in all, the State is just employing too many damn people?
That perhaps firing a few, lowering taxes so that the money fructifies in the pockets of the populace and leaving fishing contest organisers to police their own contestants might be the sensible thing to do?
Examples from this side of the pond are welcome in comments: what would be the sign that we’ve got quite enough, possibly too much, government and perhaps we should shrink it all a bit? My example might be the jams and jellies regulations which spell out that carrots are actually a fruit, jam for the making of. When we’ve laws that stupid perhaps we should have fewer of them.