Government, You Have Helped Enough!

Why does failure on the part of a government agency always mean MORE of our tax dollars are needed? Most failures outside of government result in lower revenues or collapse. If only government agencies went out of business when they proved to be failures.

Congress's current topic is energy independence and they would have us believe that more money is necessary to fix the problem. Unfortunately, at some point in the life of most bureaucracies, the original goals, however lofty, are replaced with the goal of maintaining and increasing the size of their budget.

About 80 years ago, the REA (Rural Electrification) brought electricity, often sent vast distances, to the hundreds of thousands of green power islands across the US. The artificially low prices charged masked the true costs. Prior to the REA, every farm had one or more windmills. Cisterns were built into the hillside or elevated water tanks were placed by the windmill so gravity created water pressure at the tap. Small towns had water mills for grinding grains, while building techniques took advantage of southern exposures. Eave overhangs on the south were designed for solar heat in winter and for shade in summer when the sun was higher. Sheds had flaps opening for solar heat during the day, closed at night, and hinged to provide shade and circulation in summer. These were the budding beginnings of what might have evolved into sophisticated green technologies over time. Competition and market forces can not create utopia, but -with subsidized power- advancement slowed, and some progress stopped.

'To hell with electricity on farms and small towns'? Of course not. When vast amounts are spent by the government, it does provide benefits to many, many people. Had the government not artificially lowered the price, however, the budding green solutions would have continued to advance because they would have been competitive. Saying that without the government program, there would be no power available is also wrong. Smaller power plants may have been built closer to the end users thus losing less power in transport. Great innovators of the day may have developed a solar or wind generator and energy storage technique that would today be commonly used and very affordable.

Government creates subsidies to get more participation. That is the purpose of subsidy. We subsidized electricity. Demand for electricity largely from coal fired plants, increased and waste was rampant.

Said of Hayek, "His greatest contribution lay in the discovery of a simple yet profound truth: man does not and cannot know everything, and when he acts as if he does, disaster follows. He recognized that socialism, the collectivist state, and planned economies represent the ultimate form of hubris, for those who plan them attempt-with insufficient knowledge-to redesign the nature of man. In so doing, would-be planners arrogantly ignore traditions that embody the wisdom of generations; impetuously disregard customs whose purpose they do not understand; and blithely confuse the law written on the hearts of men-which they cannot change-with administrative rules that they can alter at whim."

Subsidize single moms, get more of them (not our goal, but its a sad fact reflected in tens of millions of children never knowing a father). Subsidize Interstate highways, get more cars, more sprawl and suburbs and workplaces only reachable by auto, and the rails crisscrossing America go broke. And sadly, subsidize cheap electric energy and everyone disregards the real cost and uses more. Subsidize home ownership and financially marginal families buy homes they cannot afford. Subsidize ethanol and farmers switch to growing corn causing food prices to rise. Subsidize flood insurance and buildings spring up in flood prone areas. We subsidized hospital rooms with Medicare for the elderly and hospitals moved from non-profit to profit centers eventually purchased by conglomerates.

Congress needs to hear from us, not that we want more actions, but that they have helped us enough. Let the market decide and we can get back to a flourishing economy again.

Some programs work pretty well, Why do food stamps work so well? Food stamp recipients are not sent to a government grocery store but have access to the marketplace where competition keeps foods fresh and appealing. And we don't know or care if the grocery store owner is Jewish, Muslim (or Arab), Agnostic or Christian. It just doesn't matter; and politicians hate that --campaign coffers swell if they can define the debate using religion. Remember,
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers. ~ Thomas Pynchon

Contrast the GI bill for education, accepted at any university, to public education funding sent directly to a district hierarchy based on artificially drawn boundaries. All the arguments about God in schools evaporates when competition similar to food stamps and the GI bill are introduced allowing parents to select schools from a wide array of public (not government) choices.

Hayek again, "The [classical] liberal argument does not advocate leaving things just as they are; it favours making the best possible use of the forces of competition as a means of coordinating human efforts. It is based on the conviction that, where effective competition can be created, it is a better way of guiding individual efforts than any other." Harness this ideal in spending bills by Congress and many of our national problems would fade away.

Just don't help us anymore, Congress, you have helped enough.