Although I believe
that Jarvis was blind to the underlying reasons for the growth of government, it’s
still fair to ask whether he was correct that government can be more efficient.
The answer is
yes. Government can be more
efficient. Not only in implementing a
land-use approach that requires fewer resources, but also in the day-to-day
conduct of its affairs.
But it’s not
only government that can be more efficient.
Individuals and businesses can also be more efficient. Indeed, the harping on “governmental waste” is
much like living in a glass house and throwing stones.
Do you doubt
me? Do you have recreational equipment
in your garage that have you haven’t used in years? How about exercise equipment in your spare
room that you haven’t touched since January 2?
Or perhaps a sewing machine that is gathering dust? Or have you thrown away food that gathered
mold in the back of your refrigerator because you forgot it was there?
For those
who have worked in the private sector, have you ever replaced equipment because
routine maintenance was deferred? Spent
months developing a strategic plan only to disregard it in the day-to-day rush
of business? Perhaps implemented a new
business model, only to reject it a short time later because of internal
politics?
It’s our
nature to be inefficient, especially when we possess more than the minimum
resources needed to survive.
It’s only in
poverty, and in poverty’s business and government equivalents, that efficiency
is maximized. A person who lives at a
level of bare sustenance wears clothes until they’re nearly rags and eats every
scrap of food possible. A business or
government that is unsure of making payroll doesn’t even have the resources to think
strategically, much less to make strategic missteps.
So Howard
Jarvis was right. Government can be more
efficient. In both his era and
ours. But a government that is reduced
to the efficiency that results from dire straits lacks the resources to plan
our future.
A government
that is in constant fear of municipal bankruptcy is a government can’t
innovate, but must focus on continuing to do what it’s always done in hopes of survival. It would be like a mother who’s dumpster
diving. While she’s desperately looking
for food, she’s not planning for her children’s college education. If we insist on complete government
efficiency, we are choking off our own futures and those of our children.
Which isn’t
to say that governments don’t occasionally make bone-headed decisions for which
they should be criticized. But before
denying them revenue because of those decisions, we might want to think about
the treadmill gathering dust in our backrooms.
Rather than focusing
on shortcomings, we should be looking for ways to help government meet our
needs more efficiently, such as implementing urbanism. And afterwards, we can post those treadmills
on Craigslist.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment