This is issue #6 in the series (20 Issues – 40 Weeks) on what we need to look for in our candidates for office this November:
Regardless what the government does or what happens to our economy, life will go on. People will continue to find the things they need to survive: food, water, shelter. So why all the fear and panic about runaway inflation, systemic collapse of our financial systems, our economy, etc.?
I think the answer is easy. We all resist change. Nobody wants to go backwards. If our economy goes to pieces and we end up with, say, 25% unemployment like at the height of the Depression of the 30s, we will not be happy. We want to avoid that pain and suffering.
What can your elected officials do to improve the economy, increase job opportunities, and help prevent economic collapse? Why should we carefully choose those who will govern us based on what they can and will do to help increase job opportunities and improve our economy? In my opinion, we need to elect people who understand business and economics so that we don’t continue to get government policy that raises the cost (monetary, physical, and emotional) of doing business. We need people who will resist the urge to regulate markets and limit profits. Without profit incentive, our real economy will go away. Since the government agencies are all but immune from economic realities (need more money for a special project, just raise taxes and fees), they will be more secure places to work. No one will want to work for anyone but government agencies.
I guess my bottom line is that we need to ensure that private business is a much larger percentage of our economy than government. Current trends, under current government leadership, show that government will continue to grow much faster than business. That is an unsustainable trend. At some point, 100% of the profits from private enterprise could be confiscated by government and it still would not cover the cost of all the government’s activities.
My view is that we have two choices. Either we create incentives to encourage economic activity or we remove barriers to economic activity. I actually think we need to do both, but, to me the most important is removing barriers. In almost 40 years of experience in business, I have seen more innovation and enterprise stalled by government barriers than is encouraged by (government) incentives.
Let me give you an example of government action that causes a burden to business but which could be simply overcome by government action. If I hire someone for my business, by law I must ensure that the person has the legal right to work in this country. It is my job as a private citizen to “catch” an illegal alien. I must prove that the person I am hiring is legal through a government system called “e-verify.” I also have to fill out a form I-9 witnessing that I have seen appropriate documentation from the potential employee to prove he or she has the legal right to work here. This is not a huge barrier. It does take time to learn the system, but not much. It has penalties that make you wonder if hiring that next person will land you in jail.
On the other hand, State government agencies issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens every day and I never hear of State licensing bureaus being raided for making it easy for illegal aliens to get documentation and licenses. Wouldn’t it make sense for State and Federal Agencies to do this screening rather than private individuals? We assume that protecting our borders and administering an immigration system is a government function, yet, we require private business to do the policing. Does this make sense?
Just for fun, go to the Small Business Administration site where they offer help in compliance with government mandates before starting a business. Or go to the official business link to the U.S. Government and see how much fun it will be to start a business. I particularly like the checklist offered to help you “Stay Compliant with Laws” which includes: “Advertising Law, Employment and Labor Law, Environmental Regulations, Exit a Business, Finance Law, Patents, Trademarks, Copyright, Online Business, Privacy Laws, the Uniform Commercial Code, Workplace Safety and Health Laws, etc. In my opinion, the Small Business Administration spends a good deal of its time and your money just trying to help businesses overcome the burden of government overregulation. What do you think?
Long story short – I want to see us elect people who have experience in business and understand how government actions stifle economic activity. I want people who will work to remove government barriers to doing business. Markets and competition do a good job of showing the true cost of any good or service. The same cannot be said for Governments and price controls. Politicians with big egos believe they are smarter than the voice of millions of people who make up markets. I think and history proves they are wrong. We need to elect more humble servants of the people, not more egotists bent on proving (to themselves) that they are better than those who have elected them. I think it is our responsibility to do this.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 6, 2010 at 2:36 pm
shirley caldwell
Hi Mr. Toes,
Long story short, I totally agree with what you’ve said. I think the government has helped create a monster in the immigration system and it has blown up in their face. They are now at a loss of how to handle it. It has been mis-handled far too long. Tell me more.
May 9, 2010 at 5:07 pm
JSV
I agree in general that the government needs to be a much smaller part of our economy, though for partially different reasons.
I’ll re-phrase your post slightly, and suggest that what you’re really talking about is the “Problem of Growth,” coupled with the increasing structural failings of the fiction of the Nation-State as a construct.
While I think it’s a start to recognize that government needs to get smaller (at least if we want to move toward sustainable and resilient increases in freedom, opportunity, and median per capita happiness, as opposed to the opposite direction), this realization must be paired with an understanding of the source of the problem of growing governments. It isn’t this administration, or these politicians. No election results will reverse the trend. No new political platform of any party or politician within the system will lead to solutions. The source of the problem (and I do think you are touching on the core symptom) is instead a fundamental attribute of our *system*.
Our government is a centralized hierarchy, on two levels. Such hierarchies engage in what anthropologists call peer-polity interaction–in other words, they need to grow, or be out-competed for resources by peers that do. This is true of what some call “national” economies, of political parties, of agencies, etc. It’s a structural attribute, and can only be changed by changing the structure.
Even if, theoretically, a political party could win elections on a platform of reducing the size, scope, and intensity of government; actually deliver on those promises; and then hold on to control of government long enough to make this a trend (doubtful, in my opinion), it would be a mistake to think that this would actually impact the problem you focus on in your post. This is because the fantasy that Nation-States within a global Nation-State system are the only game in town. The Nation-State, predicated on the theory of absolute sovereignty over some Cartesian territory, is already a relic of the past, and we increasingly hold on to this guise only out of populist political expediency while our actual institutions move toward a Market-State. But most significantly, the crumbling of the Nation-State is increasingly leading to a system without true sovereignty–our world is increasingly defined by overlapping power networks: “Nation-States,” multinational corporations, trans-national black-market and gray-market networks, cross-border cultural affinities and religious identities, etc. This is why politicians cannot “solve” the problem of government growth by merely reducing the size and scope of our notion of “government”–with sovereignty of government over physical territory modest and quickly eroding, government itself is but one “peer” in the peer-polity competition between these many competing powers. Even if you could reduce “government,” without addressing the source of the Problem of Growth the end result will only be the imposition of the same growth-derived problems from another source.
While I know you’re currently focused on addressing multiple issues prior to the upcoming elections, I suggest that focusing on this issue and its cause would highlight the derivative nature of the other issues on your list as well as the long-term/big-picture irrelevancy of this fall’s elections…
May 9, 2010 at 7:48 pm
sirburton
I couldn’t agree more with the previous poster. In fact, if you read Prof. Carrol Quigley’s “Tragedy and Hope”, the history of the emerging transnational powers (“high finance”, etc…) and their manipulations that make any election result in the west a joke is recounted in all it’s sordid, infamous glory. It’s good to hear the truth from the mouth of the CFR’s in-house historian !
Sure, Obama was elected “democratically” but as soon as he filled the white house with Wall Street players, many of whom have a double nationality, the whole thing went back to business as usual for the international big boys at the expense of the US taxpayer. It’s even easier for them now with a better PR man than Bush…
Yes, the whole election process is now a charade to keep “the people” occupied while their wealth is stripped. These nasty people have destroyed the value of the dollar (and your real work) over the last 100 years, and have ruined entirely many other countries over that time for their own selfish gain.
I’ll write an article on this amazing book sometime when I get around to it on http://sirburton.wordpress.com
Probably one of the most important books of the century…
May 12, 2010 at 2:57 pm
Responses to Comments – May 12, 2010 « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] have recently been three comments to the post “20-40 (Issue 6) The Economy/Commerce“. All three were worthy of a response so here […]
June 9, 2010 at 3:59 pm
20 – 40 (issue #20) Your Favorite Issue Goes Here « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] 7. Commerce (was Issue #6) […]
July 15, 2010 at 12:10 pm
20 – 40 (Issue #8) – The Environment « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] #1, Jobs was #2, Taxes was Issue #3, Agriculture was #4, Government Spending/National Debt was #5, Commerce was #6, Energy was #7. We also did #20 – Your Issue goes here. On that one we got one response […]
October 26, 2010 at 12:05 pm
20 – 40 Unfinished Business « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] 7. Commerce (was Issue #6) […]