Skip to main content

The Unseen Costs of Government


The activities of government are made reprehensible not merely by the systematic thievery which sustains their administrations, but by the exhaustion of resources following their execution.

In spending some time at the nearby Department of Motor Vehicles, the United States Postal Service or the local police precinct, one is sure to encounter notoriously long lines, dispirited efforts and attitudes of indifference, the total of which would surely translate to opportunity for any competitor in private enterprise. However, in the public sector this is all too familiar and oddly acceptable.

This phenomenon is principally due to the complete absence of competition, as government is and has always been the chief proprietor and issuer of monopolization.

As it turns out, government is in the business of producing theatrical mirages of value at the expensive exhaustion of human capital, physical resources and the consumer goods that the regular working class competes to earn in the satisfaction of demands of other producers who do the same reciprocally, across other segments of the market, or through credit advanced to them on promises to do the same in the future.

Despite the enumerable outlays of government, one of their major costs is always left unmeasured.

This is the total cost of drainage on available capital that might otherwise be available to those who originally earned it through voluntary exchange, who might then extend this capital in the form of developed physical resources or monetary credit to others who might be held accountable for the disciplined exercise or use of said capital, as measured against its associated time value and opportunity cost.

This cycle of exchange affords measured benefits across time in such a manner that units spent are rationalized against units acquired by those who are personally responsible and liable for the acquisition and loss of those units, the comparison of which organically merits the transaction.

Any alternative mechanism for processing transactions between persons will necessarily equate to frictional loss of value between the possessor's final appraisal and the expender's anticipated value spawning from the difference between the perceived costs and expected returns.

It is by this mechanism alone that a pure time value of units can be achieved, as each unit of account then carries a semblance of the relative values derived from the market economy.

For no individual knows better how to spend one's money than the individual who earned it.

For this reason, in addition to the bureaucracy's enjoyed insulation from the accountability measures of its financiers, we can walk into a police precinct, a DMV or USPS to find employees who simply demonstrate little more than a casual desire to endure the day.

And where they tend to project charisma and enthusiasm, all of it is systematically financed by theft and remains nearly wholly irrelevant to the measured productivity of the broader market economy, as their daily toils and boondoggles do nothing to grow the total pool of resources available for scaling physical productivity or improving net output, effectually only bidding up the prices of existing resources.

And unfortunately, an increasing chunk of government is being driven automatically by the burgeoning share of fixed spending.

In 1962, roughly two-thirds of the federal budget was available for discretionary spending. Today, that figure has plummeted to 20 percent, meaning that the lion's share of government spending is on autopilot.

Fixed, non-discretionary government spending is analogous to forgetting your phone in your penthouse apartment, only to arrive at your front door and remember that you left your keys in the car, then finally electing to fund an administration to execute into perpetuity the whole process of running up and down the stairs.

And all of this is proposed as a "solution" to the many problems that the bureaucracy has either inadvertently subsidized or prevented the private markets from addressing, either explicitly through monopoly or implicitly through crowding out investment.

The most vile consequences of government escape the busy, distractible onlooker. These are the relatively inconspicuous costs attending the largely-unnoticed deprivation of skills, and the incentives to acquire them, built into the budding business model of government: equipping the masses under the veil of compassion, at the cost of opportunity.

The price of every government action is liberty, and by extension the opportunity to realize a potential that the prohibitive legislation never imagined.

This propensity of government is evidenced by the regressive minimum wage law, the public and government-sponsored school system, so-called affordable housing measures, and the unimaginable, unrealizable and unrelenting agendas of equality, among a myriad of other utopian visions whose manifestations seem only contingent upon social inertia, or enough spendthrifts, to get these initiatives off the ground.

As it so happens, these popular programs seem to operate under elegantly-devised nomenclature that leaves the unwitting observer to wonder how anyone could possibly refuse to support such a worthy social itinerary.

Of course, the casual onlooker will scarcely assume personal responsibility for the actual expenses of any of these causes, yet that individual is left with a warm sensation of having contributed by merely uttering her support or checking a box to require absolute participation, despite the several alternatives, preferences or conflicting demands facing any person who refuses.

This is the essence of Paradocracy, whereby individual wants and liberties are palatably extinguished in the name of social progress, wherein the product of any person's labor is assumed part of the whole for the benefit of all, not by voluntary contractual agreement but by proximity to others who deem this righteous. Oddly, the latter tends to envy the former. And so their destruction enables a short-term sensation of betterment in the forum of sustained and absolute degradation.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes.  The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. It was a war whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no.  In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes