Well, personally I'd keep the armored cockpit doors, policy of not cooperating with hijackers, and federal flight-deck officer program. I'm also a fan of ETD, but that technology was being used pre-TSA, so it wouldn't be subject to dismantling anyway.

Would the economic impact be greater than the bloated cost of maintaining TSA security theater?

Driving a car is much more dangerous than flying on a commercial aircraft by almost any measure, even accounting for terrorist events.

If a fully-loaded widebody crashed every month with 100% fatalities, it would still be a fraction of domestic road fatalities (< 20%). Let alone fatalities from completely preventable causes like smoking. Yet people keep driving in spite of the lack of security measures, many people continue to not wear seatbelts while driving, and a non-trivial fraction of the population chooses to keep smoking.

Nice hyperbole. Nobody wants to see a plane explode periodically "here or there." The question is whether the money, hassle, and rights-erosion that is TSA is actually preventing aviation incidents. And whether the same benefit, if any, could be achieved with drastically less visible security, less spending, less hassle, etc.

For example, what if we reverted to pre-9/11 security (except for exceptions I mentioned), took all the extra money that was being spent on TSA, and gave it to the FBI to conduct law-enforcement investigations (respecting constitutional limits and using "quaint" concepts like search warrants) and the CIA to conduct intelligence gathering (while respecting the rights and privacy of US citizens)? Could we achieve the same or even better level of "security" as TSA provides? While harassing only criminals instead of millions of innocent Americans?