[dragonwriter]

> So much for the lie that Trump would "end big gov".

The Republicans like to talk about fiscal responsibility to attack “tax and spend” Democrats, but when the Republicans are in power they are much more inclined to cut taxes than spending (they certainly redirect spending, but they never cut as much as they cut taxes.)

[fencepost]

I believe "looting" may be the word you're looking for.

[indubitable]

I don't think the actions and the goal are inconsistent. As you quoted it's all about 'ending big government.'

Taxing and spending increases the size of government. And it arguably has no end. Government is the ultimate bureaucracy and will spend every penny it receives, and then some. Even Finland, whose government takes more than 40% of its national GDP in taxes, is now somehow facing mounting government debt. It has phenomenal state programs, but will they prove to be sustainable or not? Since the government is a bureaucracy, the only way to reduce its spending is to reduce the amount of money it has available. As Milton Friedman put it, reducing taxes 'cuts the government's allowance.' Reducing taxes results in either programs being cut out of necessity, or the eventual collapse of the government under its own debt. In either case it certainly 'ends big government.'

The big hypocrisy is not in the tax cuts, but in the spending of presidents like Bush. We spent one can only imagine how many trillions in Iraq and Afghanistan. And while perhaps the military can be considered distinct from government in general, spending money on poorly justified wars we can't afford certainly precludes any notion of fiscal purpose.