Landis Vinchattle An aggregation.

I saw this posted recently, along with a very poor rebuttal which was wholly dependent upon the premise that, effectively, everything was dependent upon big government.  I see things quite differently.  Some of these may appear out of context as they were in response to the rebuttal.

tl;dr You can only perpetuate a false reality as long as someone else will tolerate it.

1. This depends upon the false premise that government is good, growth of government is better, and business existence and growth is dependent upon the same from government. The legislation creates more paperwork and hassles that require staff to deal with, so rather than hiring productive staff to perform relevant work, paper pushers are hired instead. The new legislation also creates non-essential government jobs, raising taxes across the board. Like everyone, the new government hires don’t want to see their (nonessential) jobs disappear, so they are less likely to encourage fiscally responsible government. The bureaucracy creates new departments which are encouraged to spend their budget or lose it, and must demonstrate their necessity, both of which lead to expansion of government and increase in taxation. Businesses used to provide good health insurance as an incentive to draw in the best employees, but now go with whatever they can do cheapest, which ironically costs significantly more and provides fewer benefits than good insurance used to. Business is encouraged to transfer money and jobs into offshore investments to protect against taking of earnings due to higher tax rates.

2. People don’t pay into a job market. Skilled, incentivized, dependable people find work quickly if they wish to, or create their own businesses. People lacking these traits often have fewer job choices, and government growth perpetuates this (except through the creation of government jobs). Businesses (and government, but not in a good way) create jobs and the resultant job market. Businesses continues to decide the ROI or value proposition for tasks, and chooses either to automate them out of existence or to not do them at all because there is a net loss or insignificant return. Automation likely creates a smaller number of high skill jobs as someone develops the process and/or equipment, though once created there is likely limited ongoing revenue once the process is complete, which may not even sustain the few jobs that did result. In some cases, pro government legislators and special interests are compelled to regulate the automation process, creating more government jobs, red tape, and opportunity to steer money to lobby groups… see #1. If the business decides there is insufficient value to pay more or automate the process, the jobs are not only lost, but so is whatever value those undertakings may have generated, compounded over time. That is to say, not only is the initial job lost, any revenue, discovery, or increase in efficiency that may have resulted in further jobs is also lost. Alternavely, the job may be outsourced, providing the potential for another region with less strict regulation to own the jobs coming from the automation, learn and increase efficiency within the process, and realize the time-compounded benefits thereof.

3. The government cannot give what it does not take from someone else, period. The government’s right to exist is governed by, and directly proportionately to, the extent that citizens will subjugate their own rights and free will to such a government. A proper government lends itself to as minimal an existence as possible to support the majority requirement, while self-limiting its taking in support of that which is not required, but simply requested. These resultant application of these two considerations provides the charter of the government. Defense and limited safety net are the correct province of the government in this case, not wealth equalization which is the concern of this statement. Both of these are excessive in the current case. Defense spending, while economically stimulating and contributory to job stability and growth, is proportionately inconsistent to the proper charter of this government. While we realize the intellectual gains and technological advancement from much of this spending, it remains excessive, even and perhaps especially in consideration of our often unwanted and seldom thoroughly considered aggressions and interjections towards other nation states. The safety net is the direct consideration of this question, and indeed a limited consideration under the charter. It is of our nature to consider the well-being of those who are unable to provide for themselves, either temporarily or permanently. However, taking more than required – as requested by a minority – and furthering the growth of the government, while also discouraging some form of work or contribution from the individual to the extent feasible, falls well beyond the scope of government and is instead the domain of charity and philanthropic venture.

4. Middle class workers, by definition, are already working, and not receiving – nor entitled to – greater benefit from the government. Creating more money artificially for the same value is inflation, by definition, and is harmful to an economy. See #1 for job creation especially in this case. Increased efficiency with reduced cost provides for greater disposable income regardless of class; greater regulation is not coexistent with greater efficiency. While monetary economics can artificially and arbitrarily imply the value of fiat currency, its worth will trend toward equilibrium with the value of real goods.

5. This statement should actually be phrased “When half the people work for the government, directly or indirectly, and get the idea that their jobs exist only because the other half tolerate it, and when the other half gets the idea that government perpetuates its own furtherance, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.” The government can only stimulate jobs by extricating itself to the greatest extent feasible from the equation. The government does not exist as a safety net for jobs; jobs are the realm of business, and business is furthered by limited government.