4 ms·

Obviously. Most people are not entrepreneurs and have no desire to be. It sure would be a freaky world if everyone, or even a clear majority were. Most people

Obviously. Most people are not entrepreneurs and have no desire to be. It sure would be a freaky world if everyone, or even a clear majority were. Most people don't live for their jobs, the job is just a paycheck. The federal government provides some of the most secure, highest paying with most benefits jobs in this economy. Sadly for the US, an ever growing government sector does not lead to long term prosperity, because government almost never creates value. Exceptions like funding for basic science and some infrastructure exist, but overall it's a definite net loss.

joubert 17y ago
You're literally saying that having a government is a net loss. Are you serious?
- lionhearted 17y ago
  > You're literally saying that having a government is a net loss. Are you serious? But that's not what he said. He said: 1. ...an ever growing government sector does not lead to long term prosperity 2. ...[despite a couple useful things like infrastructure and science] overall [our current government] is a definite net loss. OP wasn't advocating anarchy. He thinks USG is not doing a good job with their resources, which isn't a particularly radical point of view.
  - joubert 17y ago
    "..., because government almost never creates value". Note, not the US Government, but literally, a government. I didn't quite make the claim that he advocates anarchy, but I am questioning his attitude of trying to have and to eat his cupcake.
    - biohacker42 17y ago
      The cake is a... never mind. Small and efficient governments which create law and order are good for growth. They themselves do not create the growth, but they create the necessary conditions for growth. Government spending on the other hand, with few exceptions, does not create new value and doesn't even create the conditions for new value. It can create additional demand. If the source of the spending is debt, it can be stimulating in the short term, but it rarely is, see Japan's attempts to stimulate through government spending. Big or huge governments almost certainly are a significant net drain on productivity.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  we have little empirical data to support either position. I strongly believe that the historical record, at the very least, shows that there isn't anything the government does besides invade enemy territory that people can't accomplish on their own.

joubert 17y ago

You're literally saying that having a government is a net loss. Are you serious?

lionhearted 17y ago
> You're literally saying that having a government is a net loss. Are you serious? But that's not what he said. He said: 1. ...an ever growing government sector does not lead to long term prosperity 2. ...[despite a couple useful things like infrastructure and science] overall [our current government] is a definite net loss. OP wasn't advocating anarchy. He thinks USG is not doing a good job with their resources, which isn't a particularly radical point of view.
- joubert 17y ago
  "..., because government almost never creates value". Note, not the US Government, but literally, a government. I didn't quite make the claim that he advocates anarchy, but I am questioning his attitude of trying to have and to eat his cupcake.
  - biohacker42 17y ago
    The cake is a... never mind. Small and efficient governments which create law and order are good for growth. They themselves do not create the growth, but they create the necessary conditions for growth. Government spending on the other hand, with few exceptions, does not create new value and doesn't even create the conditions for new value. It can create additional demand. If the source of the spending is debt, it can be stimulating in the short term, but it rarely is, see Japan's attempts to stimulate through government spending. Big or huge governments almost certainly are a significant net drain on productivity.
nazgulnarsil 17y ago
we have little empirical data to support either position. I strongly believe that the historical record, at the very least, shows that there isn't anything the government does besides invade enemy territory that people can't accomplish on their own.