Undoctrination.org

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” – Frederic Bastiat

The aforementioned notion is at the very heart of what free market advocates, anti-statists, libertarians and minarchist/anarchists of all shapes and sizes must contend with. We are often seen as heartless, predatory and apathetic to our fellow human beings because most people equate the reduction or dissolution of state entities as being an exclusively negative phenomenon. This sleight of logic reverses the burden of proof and puts us on an uphill battle. Rather than statists having to justify why their means of allocating resources is superior to the decisions of millions of private individuals working in coordination, individualists are made to think that it is their responsibility to establish the notion that private individuals can make better use of the resources and bring about the intended goal in a matter that is more effective, more efficient and more ethical.

Even if one puts on ideological and ethical blinders towards the revolting act of “wealth distribution” (wealth is produced, not distributed), there is still the matter of logistics. Keeping in mind that taxation saps billions of man hours that could otherwise be attributed to productive purposes BEFORE even a single penny is collected, the costs of taxation go above and beyond the mere financial totals quoted in the official reports. It is an uneconomical use of time, energy and talents to navigate over 90,000 pages of income tax code and itemize every expense, big and small along rules that are arbitrary and blurry. This is just the hassle of dealing with the IRS, let alone paying them. Then, once the money is collected and the IRS agrees that the person has paid the “correct” amount, the lion’s share of that gets eaten up by bureaucratic mechanisms. In welfare based programs, only approximately a third of what is ultimately collected gets to end recipients. Add this to the fact that two dollars worth of business resources are misallocated paying those three dollars worth of taxes and the inefficiencies grow. Now, once money is actually spent and allocated, it is done so by a combination of opportunistic politicians, who are seeking to maximize their political yield rather than operating on any logical or altruistic purposes, and sincere, but misguided, idealists. Whether corruption or misguidance is at play, the end result is the same. Wealth redistribution is not only unethical, but inefficient and ineffective as well.

The point to all this follows. In ANY given domain currently performed by government, whether it is postage, defense, public transportation, education, roads, retirement planning, health care services, fraud prevention and so forth, there are ample historical examples of their private sector counterparts statistically blowing them out of the water, mostly for the inefficiencies alluded to above. In Fiscal Year 2009, federal, state and local expenditures comprised approximately 42.9% of the Gross Domestic Product. If these resources, or even the majority of them, were transferred from public entities to private hands, we would see a MASSIVE positive shift in the quality of living of the typical citizen, both rich and poor. That 42.9% of the GDP, in part invested towards the aims that are currently entrusted to government entities and in part saved, would do so much more for the lives and life quality of the parties involved. We need to make it clear that the reduction or dissolution of public entities would be replaced by private entities which are far more efficient, effective and ethical.

The idea that the social welfare would remain unsupported if government bodies were reduced or eliminated is categorically FALSE. Not only would it remain supported, it would be supported better and more efficiently. People don’t care how much we know unless they know how much we care. Its time that we made our position known. Freedom IS compassion.

Matthew Funk, Staff Writer