The main theme I have tried to follow for this blog is the inherent unconstitutional nature of so many of the well meaning but miss guided programs and laws coming out of the US federal government. But the often ignored crime of this continued infringement on our civil liberties is not only don’t they work as intended but many times they do more harm than good.
We see examples every day of money wasting government programs. A few weeks back we talked about the vast amounts of money poured into the department of education yet we see no tangible evidence it has done anything to raise the level of education in the US. Today I got an e mail from my oldest son. He is a US marine serving his second tour in Afghanistan and on his way to his new duty station he spent a couple of days in Kabul. He was fairly shocked to see the lack of improvements even in the capital city. When serving in the southern part of the country he was not surprised that there was not much evidence of improvement but with the billions of dollars spent over the last 8 years in aid he thought he would see some improvement in the capital. It is not for lack of trying or people who do not care; it is the problem that gigantic bureaucracies are inherently inefficient.
The government ignores the basic rules of the free enterprise system; there is no reward for success and no punishment for failure.
As designed, elections should be the thing that forces people in government to be accountable but the government has grown so big I bet that 95% of the personnel do not change even if the administration changes. Vast seas of federal workers perform most of the tasks that consume your tax dollars and they operate with no fear of job or income loss if their particular department or program is ineffective. There is no worry within the Department of Energy that the department will go under and they will lose their jobs if the department is not responsive to the needs of the customer (the tax payer). The only answer is to keep the federal government as small as possible to limit the level of inefficiency.
My good liberal friend Rich often accuses me of being uncaring because I don’t support federal tax dollars used as a form of charity. But even if I could get past the issue of the government redistributing the citizens wealth (which I can’t) I cannot get over the total lack of success or accountability of the vast majority of these programs.
Trillions of dollars have been spent since 1968 on the “war on poverty”. After impressive reductions in the poverty rate 4-5 years after President Johnson lunched the initiative, the poverty rate has stabilized and the trillions spent in the last 35-40 years has done nothing to reduce the % of people in poverty (3). What if all that money had been left in the hands of the people? What if every citizen had more money to contribute to private charities? What if small business had more money to expand their business and hire more employees? What if the money used to provide office space to the thousands of federal workers who administer the billions of dollars allocated to poverty programs was just used directly at the local level to actually help those living in poverty? Would the country and its citizens be worse off or better?
The Department of Energy was originally started to promote energy independence after the energy crisis in the 1970’s (2), yet after billions of dollars spent by the department, the country is more dependent of foreign energy than at any time in history. (4)
The examples go on and on, want to have some fun? Take the Social Security statement you receive from the government, look at the money you have been forced to ”deposit”, then calculate how much money you would have if you invested that money at even a modest return. If the government did not force you to put 12% of your income in the government program the money would be yours. If you died, it would go to who you want it to go to, die before you retire now and all the money you contributed to SS goes to the government. I know, I know, people depend on that money to retire. I read the other day where a guy said he could not afford to pay in to a retirement account and it is a good thing he had social security when he retired. Maybe if the government had not seized 12% of his income he would have had the money to save for his retirement. I think we are going to make SS a whole post in the next couple of weeks. That system is so poor it needs its own topic.
Even if you could make an argument that every program and department is of vital national interest, why is it never enough? There was a time federal spending would ebb and flow with federal income, not any more. Since 1955 federal spending has always increased. Never in the last 55 years has federal government spent less money than the year before (1).
At some point you would think it would be enough.
(1) http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html
Summary of receipts outlays surpluses 1789-2009
(2) http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=7097
(3) http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf
(4) http://willbrownsberger.com/index.php/archives/656
No comments:
Post a Comment