Government will grow smaller. The only question is whether we're willing to make the cuts necessary for a controlled shrinkage or whether we'd rather have a Soviet-style collapse down the line.
See, waiting for a collapse provides a multitude of entities to blame, which is far more entertaining than making conscientious, yet unpopular, decisions preventing "theoretical" collapse.
Why must government grow smaller? I know you want it to, but centuries of economic data can be cited as precedent for exactly the opposite theory. The public sector has consistently increased as a percentage of GDP for centuries, basically since it became possible to distinguish between public and private sectors in any given nation. The big caveat is that the percentage has risen in lockstep with a consistent rise in the GDP itself, so that even as the public sector gobbles up more and more of the total, the private sector continues to grow in absolute terms. So if GDP continues to grow (and it always has, again as far back as it's possible to define such a number), there's absolutely no reason that government must shrink. Sure, there will be ups and downs, but history says the ups can, and probably will, outweigh the downs.
Ah, but when you look at history, is there a government that has not eventually collapsed? On what grounds do we assume ours to be the exception?
Is the current size of government sustainable at current income levels? None of the solution being proffered involve solely increasing revenue to match the size of government. All involve either cutting government or worsening the debt burden. What does history tell us about governments that increase taxation to the levels we would need to make up our deficit and keep up with our government growth curve?
So, yes, based on history, I stand by the assertion that government will contract again, one way or another.
Oh, I definitely agree that it's likely the government will shrink in the short-term, especially in California. As for excessive tax burdens, history tells us that most governments eventually find some way to default on their loans, with mixed economic results -- though surprisingly mostly on the positive side. The results tend to be more negative on the political side, both internationally (it tends to piss off one's neighbors) and domestically (mostly because things usually have to be pretty bad before such steps are taken, a situation that's ripe for the rise of nasty, extremist political factions
( ... )
Comments 5
oooh, oooh, I know this one!!!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Is the current size of government sustainable at current income levels? None of the solution being proffered involve solely increasing revenue to match the size of government. All involve either cutting government or worsening the debt burden. What does history tell us about governments that increase taxation to the levels we would need to make up our deficit and keep up with our government growth curve?
So, yes, based on history, I stand by the assertion that government will contract again, one way or another.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment