When I wrote a while ago about the general wish for liberty, some of the comments reminded me of several difficulties in doing so. One of these, something often told to libertarians by the left-leaning, is government should be more efficient and better, not smaller. Better government versus smaller. I have yet to be convinced of the possibility of achieving this. This is not an in-depth post in any way, shape or form, just a quick thought, let us say.

Personally, and as a libertarian, I think it is hardly possible to make big government efficient. Which I assume shocks no one. It is not even a given that it is desirable to have big efficient government, as Frank Herbert may have observed in a book or two. As for better, it is one of those things that do not have clear, universally accepted, definitions. Like common sense, it can mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean. I often get countered with accusations of being ideological and few clear, concrete measures to achieve this mythical good big government, besides boilerplate feel good nonsense like “if we all work together” blah blah blah.

My argument is that it is not really possible to make government efficient in a significant without making it smaller because the size is often in itself the source of inefficiency: large numbers of regulations, large numbers of agencies with overlapping functions which not even the government can keep track of, complex bureaucratic organizations, and no inherent checks and balances, as one would find in a market. Man-made checks and balances are given as an alternative, but these are as flawed as the humans who design them, and equally as crooked. Experience does not show this to be a source of efficiency. I say in a significant way because, as inefficient as governments currently are, it should be possible I suppose to make them somewhat less inefficient.

Now, I’m sure we can make this quite efficient

In general, the larger and more complex a system is, the harder it is to manage. This is equally true of big corporations, which can become quite the bureaucratic nightmare and highly inefficient, but they are occasionally forced by the market situation to do something about it. This is rarely the case for government, and when it happens it is with much wailing and gnashing of teeth. It is even harder to do by bureaucrats with all sorts of agendas, with the incapacity of economic calculation, with little interest in efficiency and much interest in other things, and without any inherent constraints, as exists in the market.

When the last financial crisis hit, the corporation I work for quickly found hundreds of millions of wasteful spending brought by the previous boom. It cut more than any government did. One of the problems with corporations – one that is increasing in frequency- is precisely the need of government to intervene when the market attempts to correct something.

But, to get to the point of this post, for the sake of argument, we can give the left the benefit of the doubt. Let’s say they want good efficient big government. My problem is that they never show it. The standard should be: we believe government can be efficient and well prove it to you doubters. We will do everything in our power, leave no stone unturned, to achieve this!

We will look at every expense thrice to make sure we don’t spend unnecessarily. We will review every law and regulation to make sure it is as simple and clear as possible. We will review all the laws and regulations to see they are not deprecated, overlapping, confusing. We will work tirelessly to spend money better and regulate better. This happens approximately once in a blue moon, give or take. For all the efficiency rhetoric, they are quick to advocate for any expense that they like, for any regulation no matter how dumb. The left wing should be always ready to criticize what government does wrong, but libertarian publications seem to do a much better job of this.

Bureaucrats being a base of votes for the left, they seldom seek to make bureaucracy efficient. And this would be crucial in efficient government.  Get rid of any agency not needed or overlapping. Simplify bureaucratic procedures. Reduce the number of meaningless forms, analyze all processes in an agency. Hire external auditors and consultants and improve constantly. This happens once in a never.

So where is this desire for efficient big government? Even if such a beast would be possible–which I say it is not–it is certainly nowhere to be seen outside empty rhetoric. Didn’t the old cliche use to go “actions speak louder than words?” If people demand good, efficient big government–not small government–we have to tell them that  “there ain’t no such thing.” And no one trying to achieve it.