Efficiency isn’t everything and saving money isn’t everything, we shouldn’t expect govt to run like a business. I’m not sure who said a govt should be like an insurance company with an army, but I mostly agree.
There’s no reason to engage in the “government is or is not like a business” argument. The point is that that government gets it’s money from people who have other uses for it if the government isn’t going to use it properly. Money is a finite resource and thus should be treated as such.
What should be important is that govts provide services to people to further health, welfare, security and economic success.
Within debatable limits. Certain government services are necessary for a civil society, but if they grow too large, they start to crowd out more efficient private investment. Other government services are duplicative of the private sector or state services, and thus are not necessary.
The larger problem is that the notion that the idea that the government operates in the best interests of the people is a questionable theory. It sometimes does, but it also operates in the best interests of corporate and special interests, which are sometimes at odds with the best interests of the people. Which brings us back to “smaller is better.”
The problem with a govt “as small as possible” is that people suffer, industries take over and screw the little guy at the benefit of the rich and powerful. We see this happening now and it’s pretty scary.
Actually, you’re seeing the absolute opposite; the bigger the government, the more ways there are for industry AND SPECIAL INTERESTS (you people just love to gloss over your large activist organizations that you pretend work “for the people” and pretend they don’t corrupt the government as well) to pervert its operation and skew the government in the direction they prefer to go.
It’s not large businesses who oppose the regulatory regime, after all. Big Business LOVES regulation, as long as they can manage those regulations by hiring another accountant or three; they know that what they can manage due to their size will absolutely cripple their smaller, more innovative competitors. Large regulatory regimes allow them to sit back and make profits without having to innovate.
I say if you want a small, ineffective govt then look at Somalia for example and see how well that is working.
Nobody wants a small, ineffective government. This “Somaila” comparison is one of the stupider things liberals like to say; you’ve just shot your credibility and told me that you’re a stupid man who is easily led by the nose and doesn’t think outside the box. It’s like me saying that “all progressives want is to be the Soviet Union.” It’s intellectually fallacious in that it chooses an extreme that nobody wants, and then tries to claim that that’s what one side actually wants.
I wouldn’t get too attached to Milton Friedman, as brilliant as he was, many of his economic theory had been debunked
Utter bullshit promoted by leftist economists who desperately want to believe otherwise. He remains the person who actually figured out the Great Depression, the reason we’re still standing to day is that Ben Bernanke followed his prescriptions to the letter to avoid catastrophe in 2008, and it;s noted that you belittle the man who believed in economic freedom above all, indicating that you’re not so keen on the “freedom” idea yourself.