A very interesting rebuttal of much current economic thinking. I look forward to reading the responses.
Meanwhile, the important question, for me, is not so much how much government spends, or the volume of interventions in the economy, as the kind of things that are supported and/or suppressed by such actions. A good example is health care and opioids: is there a correlation between the increased spending and the growing opioid addiction? (You seem to suggest there may well be). You also mention croneyism and lobbying which drive regulations and subsidies and/or restrictions on new entrants to lucrative markets.
In short, the argument ought not to be about the size of government but about the objectives of governments’ involvement in the economy. (I use a plural deliberately as this is not a uniquely Amercan problem — I am a UK citizen living in Ireland and similar problems characterize our economies too.)