The Cult of Government Responds

The cult of government just continues to grow, and members apparently develop psychological coping mechanisms that absolutely prevent them from understanding that forced taking is at best a necessary evil. Like all cults, the belief that their work is good gets morphed into absolutes about their work being a superior form of good. Good old UW-Madison officially releases a “study” predicting dire consequences from spending restraint.

Analysis Critical of Proposed Constitutional Revenue Limits: MADISON - Proposed limits on the amount of revenue Wisconsin governments can collect would reduce public services, hamstring the state's future economic growth, and diminish local control, according to an analysis by a University of Wisconsin-Madison economist.

"If the costs of providing public services continue to grow faster than the inflation and population growth rates, the impact of the amendment would be to continuously reduce the level and quality of public services," says Andrew Reschovsky, professor of public affairs and applied economics. ... For a copy of the analysis, visit:

http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/calendar-news/2006/reschovskyanalysis.pdf

The essence of the professor’s argument seems to be that government services are the most essential contributors to the well being of both society and the economy. There is the subtle arrogance of elitism in thinking that government activity is more important than either private sector activity or the right of individuals to make their own decisions. The condescension shows up in the way household spending is compared to public service expenses.

While this limit may at first glance appear reasonable, it is important to remember that by design the CPI is based on a “market basket” of goods and services purchased by the typical household. Governments however, purchase a very different basket of goods and services. A substantial share of their budgets goes to pay for the services of highly-skilled labor, for example, police officers, teachers, and doctors. A significant portion of the budget of families goes towards the purchase of food, clothing, and various consumer durables.

Left to pursue their own desires, families will spend their money on food, shelter and play things, whereas the government needs to pay for important “skilled” individuals. I fully understand the need for police, but I also understand that the private sector has some good teachers and doctors. I might even go as far as saying that private education and private medicine is generally better than the results achieved by the tax paid providers.

A problem with advocates for the status quo big government system is exactly this belief that services need to be provided by direct employees rather than by contracted private labor. Madison has great water and parks departments, but there is no reason private plumbing firms and private landscaping companies could not bid for the labor now being done by direct employees. These types of reasonable approaches to government reform will never win the approval of those people invested in the existing power and payroll structures.