Closing All Those Departments: What Happens To The People Who Work For Them?

[acptulsa]

Nobody can say what will happen in each case. Central managers can never work out all the details that the free market can or be able to explain how the free market does it. Some of those people will be unemployed (where it's worth noting that they're productivity will stay the same as what it is now). Others won't. But the net result of having the government control less of the economy will be that unemployment overall will be lower without those departments existing than it would be with them.

Let's see if I can rephrase this otherwise perfect answer so people will respond better to it.

I don't know where these bureaucrats will find work. Once Ron Paul so slashed the bloated federal budget that he has not only stopped running up the debt to the point where no one has faith in the economy, but has cut your taxes as well, then you will decide where the new jobs are created--when you decide where to spend the money you're no longer sending to Washington. Perhaps you'll give it to charity--then that sector will employ more. Perhaps you'll insist your local taxes go up to make up for the missing services--then your county will hire more. Perhaps you'll just blow it on ice cream--and the dairy industry will take on more employees.

Not just up to me. When he cuts his taxes, you'll help decide who does the hiring.

Both of these answers, by the way, are just variations on what he said on Fox Sunday.

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

235,000 jobs would be lost according to Wayne Rogers.

RON PAUL 'S $1 TRILLION SPENDING CUT PLAN

Housing: Product of 1960s

Energy: Product of 1970s

 

[kuckfeynes]

The fallacy here is the Keynesian notion that you can just create jobs (or money) out of thin air. You have to consider the net result. Every time the government "creates" jobs, it consumes capital to pay for them that otherwise would have been put to use in the market. Because bureaucracies are inherently (and often dramatically) less efficient than markets, more will always be destroyed than created. Conversely, the capital that will be freed up by the elimination of 235,000 government jobs will allow for the creation of far more... potentially millions.

So to answer the question of what's going to happen to the poor unemployed bureaucrats... They will get new jobs, and so will countless others.

 

[craezie]

Maybe they can transfer to the Department of Transportation and once the government is not spending so much money on bureaucrats pushing paperwork, they can actually spend the tax dollars on stuff they are supposed to do (and aren't anymore).

I suggest they give all of the laid off paper pushers a shovel and some tar, and hold a contest on who can fill the most potholes in an hour. The top 15% can have a job permanently filling potholes. The rest will have to actually compete for jobs with the rest of us.

 

[Rfalcon51]

Mostly everyone on these forums detests the propaganda used to make Americans hate our foreign enemies. It is amazing how quick though many use "Libertarian" propaganda to make limited government people hate government workers. Not every government worker is a a bureaucrat pushing paperwork, or a leech. Most are everyday hardworking Americans (who are working just as hard as anyone in the private sector) who took a job to support their family. It is ridiculous to demonize them on a whole. It may not be possible for the government to create "real" jobs, but it is not necessary to degrade government workers on a whole. We are better than that, we need to educate, and get people to realize that government jobs cut will migrate to other areas.

 

[MJU1983]

They have to get a REAL job.

Oh, you took mine!!!

 

[Paul4Prez]

What happens to all the government workers who will be out of work when Ron Paul submits his first budget? The taxpayers can stop paying them!

 

[kuckfeynes]

It is true that most government workers (and union workers who get special gov't privileges) are not bad people and are just trying to make a living.

The problem is that it comes at the expense of so many others who are unable to do the same because of it.

Once you figure out why that is so, it's hard to not be even a little bit jealous at those profiting off the same system that is hindering the economy for everyone else.

Just like it's not unreasonable to be upset at the Wall Street banks, even though they really only took the cheese that was being dangled in front of them.

And it's even more irritating when public workers assume such a begrudged attitude when they are doing way better than the average American worker.

So while I don't hate my mailman, he is a miserable bastard, and I wouldn't feel sorry for him if he had to work for UPS instead.

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

 

[captain]

What about just bringing corporations BACK to America so citizens can find jobs? That would help a lot.

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

What do you make of this latest news from Obama about shrinking government?

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/45992403/#45992403

 

[unknown]

This?

 

[nc4rp]

i know what govt jobs are like. they dont call it CLUB FED for nothin.... they work to preserve their job by slowing the job to a crawl. because the govt will fire ya in a heartbeat so everyone tries to protect their own job.

if the govt wasnt so heartless then peopel might work harder and teh govt actually be 10x productive

 

[nc4rp]

This?

love this. it ran on my local tv station last night. was awesome!

 

[S.Shorland]

Bringing the troops home would be equivalent to an addicted gambler going nightly to a casino and then being given his losings back at the end of the evening.After the surprise and delight wore off,his wife would advise him to invest the money in something more productive (not tax it away from the populace beyond what is strictly necessary for the defense of america). See Bastiat's 'That which is seen and that which is unseen.' 'The demobilization' 2.(1.22) http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basEss1.html#Chapter 1

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

 

[Fort Lauderdale]

 

[TomtheTinker]

I really do fear that the vast majority of people are incapable or unwilling of comprehending the solutions the freemarket offers.

 

[bcreps85]

All of the jobs wouldn't be cut. The ones that are actually necessary or useful will be merged into other agencies. To those people who are cut...they'll be in the exact same boat as the rest of us, working a private sector job where they actually have to compete in the work force and therefore will become a boon to the economy rather than a burden.

Will it be tough for them? I'm sure. My heart truly weeps for those who have had an easy life on the taxpayer dime for far too long, making much more than the privately employed citizens who fund their salaries.

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

Broken window fallacy at work with OP. Think beyond a day in front of your face. When you cut $1T in spending, what does that mean? Lower taxes because you don't need as much cash to finance the government. What does that mean to the people? More money in their pocket to use as they see fit, which includes venture capitalist start-ups and local jobs that would otherwise have been unfilled due to lack of funds.

The money saved by taxpayers and used to create jobs will will much more than offset the jobs lost via cuts in gov't spending.