Government Spending

Janet Yellen Sells Big Business on Big Government

The treasury secretary told the Chamber of Commerce that an activist government funded by higher corporate taxes would be a boon for business too.

|

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen came out swinging against small government today in a speech intended to sell business leader on President Joe Biden's massive $2.3 trillion American Jobs Plan and the corporate tax hike that'll be needed to pay for it.

"For decades, the prevailing focus has been on the need to decrease and then limit the size of government as a share of the economy," said Yellen in remarks before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "This approach to U.S. fiscal policy, founded on a distrust of government motives and effectiveness, along with resistance to higher taxes, has had profound effects on our nation and our people."

Anyone paying attention to ever-growing federal spending and the national debt might be confused by the supposed era of fiscal restraint Yellen is describing.

Yellen concedes that spending on entitlements, like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, has only continued to grow, as has military spending. But increased largesse on those particular budget priorities, when combined with a supposed consensus about shrinking the size of government, says Yellen, means that "discretionary spending has been compressed as a consequence."

Yellen caveats this point, too, by saying that "exceptions have been made, most often in the form of temporary support for the economy following shocks and in times of recession."

Non-defense discretionary spending—which includes federal outlays for transportation, education, and low-income support programs—spiked in response to the Great Recession and, particularly, during the pandemic. In between these two crises, however, that particular slice of federal funding did fall to a post-1962 low when compared to the size of the overall economy, according to the progressive Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

If one focuses just on non-defense discretionary spending part of the budget, it looks almost like we've been living in a small government paradise, argues Yellen, saying "ambitious and valuable initiatives like the Affordable Care Act engendered enough controversy to foreclose at that time the possibility of broadening the agenda."

Yellen goes on to list a number of ills resulting from this supposed fiscal restraint, including deteriorating, out-of-date infrastructure, an education system that hasn't kept up with technological change, and a lack of support services for families, including childcare. Big picture problems like economic inequality and climate change have only gotten worse in the absence of an activist, ever-growing government, she adds.

"That is why the President proposed the American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan," says Yellen. "These policies will promote a dynamic economy with greater opportunity for workers, higher living standards, and, over time, reduced inequality."

The massive increase in federal spending envisioned in both plans—and the corporate tax increases the administration is pushing to pay for it—will also be a boon for business, Yellen told the chamber, saying, "We are confident that the investments and tax proposals in the Jobs Plan, taken as a package, will enhance the net profitability of our corporations and improve their global competitiveness."

The promise of increased corporate profitability is obviously a necessary ploy to get the business community on board with the Biden administration's agenda. Yellen went much further in her remarks by arguing for a permanent expansion of the size and scope of the federal government.

"It is the time to recommit our government to playing a more active and smarter role in the economy. The administration's planned actions are not fiscal stimulus in the way we have seen in the past," she said. "Nor are they intended to target a particular size of government."

Yellen's remarks fit squarely into what the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip has termed "Bidenomics," which calls for massive federal spending aimed at reshaping the economy and society without heeding traditional concerns about inflation, deficits, and the potential "crowding out" of private investment.

Interestingly enough, the details of the American Jobs Plan fall short of the expansive vision Yellen outlined in her speech. Biden is relying on a corporate tax hike to cover the entirety of the $2.3 trillion in American Jobs Plan spending in an effort to keep his promise not to raise taxes on Americans making under $400,000 a year. To make that math work, the spending will have to sunset after eight years, while those corporate taxes will have to last for 15 years.

Yellen's remarks, however, seem to suggest that Biden's budget gimmickry has much more to do with political expediency than any real desire on the part of the administration to pay for its spending proposals or have them lapse eventually.

The era of small government has been over for a while. The only question now is what constraints government will impose on itself absent a healthy fear of excessive government debt.

NEXT: North Carolina Releases Body Camera Footage of Deputies Killing Fleeing Suspect

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.

    1. USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…..VISIT HERE

  2. She speaks the truth about the shrinking size of the government – except for the parts that have expanded, the size of government has hardly grown at all. Sure, just off-hand I can’t think of any parts of the government which haven’t expanded, but it’s tautologically true that the parts that haven’t expanded haven’t expanded.

    1. Has to read your comment more than once:

      “…except for the parts that have expanded, the size of government has hardly grown at all…I can’t think of any parts of the government which haven’t expanded, but it’s tautologically true that the parts that haven’t expanded haven’t expanded.”

      What she said [excellent paraphrase, I think]

  3. She didn’t need to, big business has already bought out big government.

    1. I think it is more a case of, if the government is throwing money around, if you don’t try to get some, some other business will get it all. Ask yourself how the government would deal with a corporation that very publicly objects to big spending.

      1. ^ This. Among executives at large construction and engineering firms basically everyone is a Democrat, and it’s not because they embrace wokeness and socialism.

        1. No, embracing it is just the price they must pay.

  4. “The only question now is what constraints government will impose on itself absent a healthy fear of excessive government debt.”

    Absolutely none. Zero. Zip. The sky is the limit. Until it falls.

    1. Beat me to it. Absent a healthy fear of excessive government debt, why would it impose any constraints on itself?

      1. Government is the way we hyperinflate ourselves into a death spiral together.

  5. From a Koch / Reason libertarian perspective, government should be whatever size is best for creating the conditions under which billionaires — especially our benefactor Charles Koch — can prosper. And given how well billionaires are doing under Biden, this Administration seems to have found the sweet spot.

    #LibertariansForBiden

    1. You don’t seriously expect the writers to actually read what gets published here?

  6. Absolute total nonsense to think that by taking money from the job makers the government will produce jobs in some magic way.

    1. “Absolute total nonsense to think that by taking money from the job makers the government will produce jobs in some magic way.”

      Not at all. The government will create lots of new jobs. Mostly useless, and at way too high a cost. It’s not magic. It’s stupidity.

      1. Nazi’s (def; National Socialists) compulsively love telling you that you’d be better off having MORE Gov-Guns threatening you and stealing from you. It’s 2x as much fun for them than stealing candy from a baby.

        Government isn’t a promotional entity. It is not “ideas”………………..
        IT IS *FORCE* by the threat of pointing GUNS!!!!!!

        That mistaken misconception that has literally got more blood on it’s hand throughout history than any other misconception.

  7. Yellen is the Fauci of finance.

    1. She secretly funds all of the problems from which she claims to be trying to save us? Yeah, that sounds more or less accurate.

    2. LOL

    3. She is so incompetent that she thinks the extra $300/week in unemployment compensation isn’t affecting anyone’s willingness to work, too. If the US has ever had a worse Treasury Secretary, I can’t think of one.

      1. Obama appointed a tax cheat to oversee the collection of taxes as Treasury Secretary – but still not as bad as Yellen.

  8. “This approach to U.S. fiscal policy, founded on a distrust of government motives and effectiveness, along with resistance to higher taxes, has had profound effects on our nation and our people.”

    These people make my skin crawl.

    1. It’s a real shame we’ve lost all trust in government. I wonder how the hell that happened?

    2. This is a woman who makes $90k an hour to speak at investment banks.

      Before the misogynistic straight white supremacy supporting men comment- – please move along nothing to see here.

    3. It’s weird how they assume government should be trusted.

      Maybe in some utopian pipe dream.

      1. >>assume

        demand.

        1. I don’t think they really care about trust anymore, so long as they’re obeyed.

          1. This post thread is right on. That’s pretty much how that evolves.

            Assume -> Demand -> They no longer care. Just obey!

            Amazing how the people who assume we should trust them aren’t the ones actually affected by the decisions of the fellow overlords they lunch with. Yellen is as much a resident of the ivory tower as anyone, ever.

  9. So, what she’s saying is, if the government spends more money, the rich can keep getting richer.

    Now, this is a democrat administration, correct?

    1. Of course. Why else do you think all the billionaires put their money on Team Blue?

      1. “Why else do you think all the billionaires put their money on Team Blue?” In case Team Blue won, they needed to buy access to government agencies and Congress and ensure that whatever schemes Team Blue came up with to confiscate wealth and regulate businesses to death, there would be loopholes that only billionaires can use.

    2. That’s OpenBordersLiberal-tarian’s First Law. Democrats campaign on an anti-rich / pro-working-class platform, but once in power they invariably govern in the interests of the 1%.

      1. Maybe you should vote for socialists then. Certainly better than the GOP.

        1. I’m too rich for that to be in my own self-interest.

          1. Totally. I get it. What would you say to people that make under 50k/yr and vote for the GOP because of abortion and cancel culture? That they’re idiots?

            1. Not really. It would be because the cost of living makes 50k the equivalent of $250-300k in a blue city. Minus the roaches, rats, muggings, murders, gangbangers, carjackings. Probably more disposable income also.

              Socialist states have the highest inflation and poverty rates adjusted for COLA. Gee I wonder why?

            2. Perhaps they are smart enough to have noticed what happens to socialist societies over the past 100 years.

              1. That they have universal health care, high standards of living, and cradle to grave social security? Is this something people should fear and, if so, why?

                1. Socialism = capitalism with safety net.

                  1. Socialism = low prices but empty shelves at the stores, unless you can get into the nomenklatura stores. Socialism = free health care, and almost worth the zero that you pay for it (shortages of medicine, long waits for cancer diagnosis and treatment, etc.) Socialism = “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

                    That safety net is worthless once socialism has destroyed the economy so there is no food and clothing to give away.

                2. Check out a book called Animal Farm.

                3. Bank Robbers have lots of money too.. Should people fear bank robbers?? If so; why???

                  You’re a criminalistic buffoon. You think mans creations just falls from the sky like a plantation owner with “owned” SLAVES…

                  Bank Robbers are great until your bank gets robbed.

                4. name one.

            3. “…What would you say to people that make under 50k/yr and vote for the GOP because of abortion and cancel culture?..”

              I’d say they’re much more intelligent than parasitic pieces of lefty shit like you.

            4. They’re probably less butthurt about their paychecks than you are.

              1. Should they be more butthurt over abortion and cancel culture instead? I call that dumb.

                1. They’re probably a lot less butthurt over that than you are of your paycheck, that’s for sure.

            5. Socialists really should be executed. To protect the rest of us from their slavery.

        2. How do you tell the difference? The GOP plays the foil for the democrats, but they still end the night having a drink together while counting the takings from the rubes.

      2. That’s a racist and xenophobic comment. Check your privilege and take a time out.

  10. “For decades, the prevailing focus has been on the need to decrease and then limit the size of government as a share of the economy,”

    The government doesn’t produce anything, you hag. Are we supposed to build our economy on CRT and prosecuting Trump voters for crimes against Pelosi’s desk?

  11. It should be concerning that her entire speech is summed up by the phrase “stop hitting yourself”

    1. Heh.
      +1

      1. Yes. Why couldn’t Reason had added upvotes along with the Mute button?

  12. “Nice biz you got there. Be a shame if something happened to it.”

  13. “..what the Wall Street Journal’s Greg Ip has termed “Bidenomics,” which calls for massive federal spending aimed at reshaping the economy and society without heeding traditional concerns about inflation, deficits, and the potential “crowding out” of private investment.”

    So that’s what they are calling modern monetary theory now.

    1. “Bidenomics”

      Pretty sure some German guy called dibs on those ideas in the 19th century.

      1. Nope, Marx never imagined government could spend money it didn’t have indefinitely. He _did_ very mistakenly imagine government could confiscate everything to get what it would give away, and not destroy the sources of those goods. He _did_ very, very mistakenly imagine that his system wouldn’t create a ruling class as far above the workers as the Krupps were in 19th Century Germany.

    2. It’s like the New Deal, but without the fiscal restraint.

      1. New Old Deal or Old New Deal? Not sure if the emphasis goes on the geriocrat in brief or the FDR/Marxist origin.

        1. The Old New Deal is still new to Joe.

      2. She’s no dummy. When the real shit hits, she’ll be dead.

  14. Hey Reason, where’s the media on Biden releasing sanctions on a Russian pipeline 5 days after a hacked pipeline causing gas lines?
    #BidenRussiaBidenRussia

    The media message of *Impeach Biden*should be fun to watch!!!

    1. One might wonder; how come Russian pipelines are OK, but US pipelines have to be shut down to get rid of high paying jobs?

  15. activist government funded by higher corporate taxes would be a boon for business too.

    Of course it would be. Despite what the idiots on the left think economic freedom benefits consumers, not businesses.

  16. She’s a LIAR. “For decades, the prevailing focus has been on the need to decrease and then limit the size of government as a share of the economy,” She can’t possibly think this is true therefore she’s a LIAR. Either that or she’s an insane person.

    1. How about “both”?

  17. “Yellen’s remarks fit squarely into what the Wall Street Journal’s Greg Ip has termed “Bidenomics,” which calls for massive federal spending aimed at reshaping the economy and society without heeding traditional concerns about inflation, deficits, and the potential “crowding out” of private investment.”

    —-Christian Britschgi

    There’s nothing new about “Bidenomics”. We should probably reacquaint ourselves with the likely consequences of these old policies with the old names for their effects, too. We might start with “stagflation”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation

    1. Between this and the gas lines, I wonder if Disco is about to come back.

      1. It sure could be.

        Have you seen the hideous high waisted jeans women are wearing these days? They looked terrible on 90% of their wearers in 1980, they look terrible today, and yet here we are again. Everyone’s doing it because, well, everyone is doing it.

        That’s OK. You don’t need a wheelbarrow to carry a debit card.

      2. BITE YOUR TOUNGE!

      3. If there were disco again, it might bring another wave of punk rock as a reaction, and that would be great. I don’t this generation has punk rock in their genes anywhere. Their kids and grandkids may rebel against the hippie values and leisure suits of the Millennials (and their kids), but that’s a long way off. There needs to be a generation gap before there can a consequence of that. And this is a generation that continues to try to please their parents well into their forties. Nothing good can come from this. Resentment against parental authority may even be the mother of all libertarianism.

        1. I guess that I’m the only one doing parental rebellion correctly, then. My daughter is inches from being a full on Bernie Br- Sis.

    2. The devil you know. I hope we’re not longing for Yellen once the progressives push the fed chair into a Zimbabwe state

  18. I know I know evil psychopaths run the show now … but man the last guy was *so mean* with his phone … and his hair was just ridiculous

  19. If something does not intervene to return the US back to a small federal government there will be no need for any thing except the federal government.
    Why would we need fifty state legislators and all that goes with it since the federal congress could do all the law making and the Justice Department could do all the law enforcement federal court systems could handle all the legal situations and prosecute the criminals, etc. We could eliminate all the duplication that we have in the governmental system we have now.
    The president could appoint supervisors for the major political subdivision and the supervisor could appoint supervisors for the subdivisions be low that level with all of these appointments be approved by congress.

  20. I listened to her make these remarks. It was very disappointing to hear her toe the line so tightly – say things I’m not convinced she believes. Did she just tell business interests to sit quietly and play in their own yard? It was, however, a place where the administration could draw the thick line between risk-takers/capitalists and the regulators/union sycophants, and they did.

    1. You just can’t get the socialist out of folks like Yellen..it is almost genetic…something about the water in the old Russia/Eastern Europe that so many “economists” are addicts..

  21. So I guess it all boils down to is higher prices are good for you? More expenses are better? Up is down?

  22. The road to prosperity is paved with higher taxes!

    1. And rationing

  23. FedGov passed the point of future insolvency over 20 years ago, at the very moment that “journalists” were hailing Federal budget surpluses.
    This, too, will end in tears, but it could be another 20 years before the consequences are acutely felt and seen.
    I have no interest in propping up this decadent empire. The sooner it collapses, the better.

  24. And so the difference between big government and big business is…?
    Yea, me neither.

  25. Crony Capitalism is a big flaw in our system and Janet Yellen wants more businesses to “buy into” the idea that if you accept government largess “you owe your soul to the company store”.

    1. Come to the Dark Side Luke

  26. The Chamber of Commerce has been the home of crony capitalists for a very long time. Yellen is just reminding them of the benefits their members will be receiving in exchange for supporting the party line.

  27. It’s really a BOGO deal if you think about it. I mean, who doesn’t like a good deal? And what could go wrong?

  28. Janet Yellen Sells Big Business on Big Government

    Yellen’s ideological predecessor, Goring, already did that successfully in 1937; just ask IG Farben, Ford, IBM, Krupp, Hugo Boss, Porsche, Siemens, Volkswagen, Mercedes, and many other big corporation.

  29. She’s selling big govt to its owners? That’s impressive.

  30. Vote for fascists, get fascism, who knew?

  31. Rent-seekers R Us

  32. Hmmm…A Clockwork Orange style reprogramming session with IV-drip thrown-in: 24×7 Mises Institute videos, clips of Hayek, Uncle Milty (Friedman), Tom Sowell, Murray R and of course Ron Paul. Will it help? Maybe but at least the hands are off the control system.

  33. Rule one: Keynesian economists “science” is wrong.
    Rule two: Government officials and the media love Keynesian economists because they tell the officials printing money and govt spending is good.
    Rule three: The media has a belief that “rent an economist” Keynesians are real “economists” and hence their mutterings should be gospel (sorry no insult to the legions of Jewish Keynesians like Yellen, Bernanke and so on)>

    To be honest Yellen is clueless on economics..as was Bernanke and most of them. Simple concepts like marginal analysis, opportunity cost, impact of artificial low interest rates and so on are beyond her. They have a fake “physics” to borrow an analogy..they believe in a perpetual motion machine..

    1. “Rule one: Keynesian economists “science” is wrong.”

      Likely true, but not yet been shown.
      Keynes ‘theory’ required governments to return the excess taxation when the economy rebounded. So it’s “wrong” in the assumption that *any* government would cut established income streams. Yes, it’s happened once or twice (like under the last POTUS), but…
      So, like ‘true Communism’, it’s never really been tested; the lack of the ‘new soviet man’ doomed the later.

  34. What everyone seems to be missing is that the Biden Administration has plans and knows how to move those plans ahead. Instead of wasting a lot of time on Republicans in Washington DC go to the people they answer to. Businesses can easily take a hit on the taxes for real commitment to infrastructure. If your a business person and your trucks move over I40 or your supply chain depends on I40 you are probably looking for some infrastructure investment right now.

    1. Goddam, you’re just an empty vessel to be filled with their pablum, aren’t you? Didn’t you question ANYTHING after the KungFlu relief bill? It ate up over 90% of $2 trillion on non relief spending. Do you question any of that?

      Likely not.

      1. First, if you had read any of my comments during debate on Covid19 relief funds you would noted that I have consistently suggested that the relief should be lower and targeted to those most affected. My wife and I had no need for those funds and we have routed money we did get to charities.

        Second there is nothing in my post that suggests the funds are good or bad my post notes instead focuses on strategy of getting the agenda advanced. Noting that infrastructure is popular with businesses because make use of that infrastructure and noting the problem of I40 as an example.

        So do you question the strategy?

    2. It’s often easy to confuse you with OBL: The statements are witless to such a degree as to make the comparison perhaps favorable to OBL:

      “What everyone seems to be missing is that the Biden Administration has plans and knows how to move those plans ahead.”

      Do you reckon this might be a “5 Year Plan”, you fucking ignoramus?

      1. Couldn’t be worse than your Team GOP. They lost 12 million jobs the last time they ran things. Maybe socialists should run things.

        1. “Couldn’t be worse than your Team GOP. They lost 12 million jobs the last time they ran things. Maybe socialists should run things.”

          You mean those GOP stalwarts Newsom and Cuomo, you steaming pile of lefty shit?
          Sort of thought so. Make your family proud and increase the level of human intelligence; fuck off and die.
          Oh, and make sure you mark the grave so your dog knows where to shit.

    3. Oh, and I missed this bit of idiocy:

      “…Businesses can easily take a hit on the taxes for real commitment to infrastructure…”

      You claim to be either retired or close to it, and yet you spout the most adolescent bullshit, so we can assume you’re retired from slopping at the public trough.
      Hint: Businesses don’t pay taxes; their customers and employees do.
      What a fucking ignoramus!

    4. Why would you believe that this round of infrastructure spending will improve I-40 or any other road not leading to a Democratic leader’s house? These people hate cars and want all the proles restricted to buses, trains, and bicycles. (But at least around here, they design bike paths that don’t connect, because they can’t monitor and control where individuals go on bikes and so don’t really want us using bikes for practical transportation.)

  35. Related:

    https://twitter.com/RubinReport/status/1394807618489622531?s=19

    They’re here to burn it all down. And until everyone realizes that they will drag us all into hell with them…

    “Democrat Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock told a group of college graduates they need to do their part to get the U.S. out of “COVID-1619” in a commencement speech Saturday: [video]“

  36. “It is the time to recommit our government to playing a more active and smarter role in the economy. The administration’s planned actions are not fiscal stimulus in the way we have seen in the past,” she said. “Nor are they intended to target a particular size of government.”

    Take Two:
    “It is the time to recommit our economy to playing a less active and smarter role in the government. The fiscal stimulus’s past actions are not the administration in the way we have imagined for the future,” she said. “In particular, they are targeting an intended government of size.”

    This is why she pulls down the big bucks.

  37. Don’t look at me!
    May.18.2021 at 2:32 pm
    “Absolute total nonsense to think that by taking money from the job makers the government will produce jobs in some magic way.”

    It is axiomatic that trade between to free agents increases mankind’s wealth; The agent offering the good finds the money more valuable than the good and the agent offering the money finds the good more valuable than the money. They both profit by the exchange.
    As such, it is obvious that taxation, being a transaction *NOT* between two agents leaves at least one a loser. Humanity, too; a government *NEVER* spent money with anywhere near the results of a free agent.

    1. Well, except for fighting commies and paying idiots to invade Vietnam and Iraq. Those things were ok

      1. I’m happy you showed up to prove how stooooooopid lefty shits can be; you seem to make a career of it.
        It goes without saying that fucking, uneducated, lefty ignoramuses like you have no idea that Truman first provided US ‘advisors’ to the French in the hopes of maintaining their colony and placating De Gaulle.
        Now please explain how Vietnam and Iraq had anything at all to do with a free market, you steaming pile of lefty shit.

      2. I spent 8-1/2 years in uniform and 2-1/2 working for a defense contractor, and I _know_ the military does not do anything well. It just doesn’t screw up as badly as would happen if they hired mercenaries or street gangs to fight a war. Usually. The exception is the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, when the French Army was utterly defeated in 6 weeks, but street gangs and other civilians defended Paris for 4 months. Most armies aren’t screwed up that badly – but as long as they can defeat a street gang, an army’s only competition is other armies, and they’re all screwed up.

  38. The treasury secretary told the Chamber of Commerce that an activist government funded by higher corporate taxes would be a boon for business too.

    Yellen: C’mon, guys, Zuckerberg, Dorsey and that guy who runs Google is on board, so who else will step up?

  39. Yeah, it’s a good point. We try to limit government’s scope in the private economy, and eventually there’s a catastrophe and government has to bail everyone out. It’s a matter of paying for a less risky system as we go, or letting it fall apart and spending trillions of dollars to clean up the mess.

    The very rich do pretty fine either way. Probably better in the regular-catastrophe scenario.

    Are all of you very rich?

    1. No, but we’re all not as stooooooooopid as you, shitstain.

    2. I’m going to try some Yellen speak on behalf of corporations:

      “For decades, the prevailing focus has been on the need to decrease and limit the size of corporations as a share of the economy. This approach to commerce, founded in distrust of corporate motives and effectiveness, along with resistance to higher prices, has had profound effects on our nation and our people.

      With our comprehensive Raise Prices Now plan, America will enjoy rising living standards and reduced inequality. By paying more for your goods and services, corporations will be able to hire more workers, pay higher salaries, and invest in innovations that make our future more productive and brighter, all while affording new approaches to carbon management. In fact, I’m shocked you’re not just forking over money for free right now. What are you waiting for? The government to do it for you?”

      1. Big corporations love regulations that increase prices because it tends to hurt their smaller competitors more than them.

      2. She could have made it simpler and explained to them how much more complicated it would be to make profit in an environment in which the Trump cult is shitting all over the US federal government and making policy according to Ben Shapiro’s latest lying genocidal brain fart.

        Corporations are run by people who are just people, and people are fucking morons. If they are fixated on a fairy tale of low taxes but are neglecting the basic security that comes with a functioning stable government, then they need to be schooled, for all of our sake.

        1. a functioning stable government

          Oh, I think I found your problem:
          run by people who are just people, and people are fucking morons.

          1. Correct sir. This is the precise motivation for the framers setting up a system of checks and balances. It doesn’t matter if the president is Jesus H. Christ, the idea that one guy or one idea can rule is inherently flawed. There is wisdom in cliches: power corrupts. I might add, people are fucking morons, thus, don’t give any one or few of them too much power. It goes for politicians and it goes for tech CEOs. All morons, at least in some ways.

            I don’t know why I have to explain this to an educated person like you, but the difference between a corporation and the government, even if we’re talking about their ideal forms, is that the people don’t get a vote in what the corporation does, and there are no checks on what the CEO wants to do.

            Don’t tell me you’re for freedom and then snuff out every flicker of checks and balances you can find in favor of a million petty autocracies.

            1. And the difference between a corporation and the government is that people have a choice of multiple corporations to do business with, and can engage with multiple simultaneously, and ignore the majority of them completely.

              That’s so much better than voting for the one government (which really isn’t a meaningful choice of anything that actually affects your life) and then obeying it’s commands like a dictator or moving a thousand miles (if the government lets you, on its exit terms).

              I really shouldn’t have to explain this to you, because it’s obvious that corporations don’t have dictator-like control of your life. Who needs votes when you have real choices?

              Queue the “oh but in my counter-factual alter-universe, limited government leads to corporate takeover of your entire life! Like a government! Horror! Better fork over 50% of your income now and be grateful! Scared shitless of shadows, but grateful, nonetheless!”

              1. Corporations have overthrown governments and enslaved people. I appreciate your love of freedom, but at some point you need to walk through the door and join us here in the real world. It’s not a competition between corporations and government. And if it were, I choose the one I get a vote on. The fantasy land you live in might have perfect competition, but the real world has collusion and monopoly without checks on those things.

                The market is a tool, not an idol to worship. No market has ever existed without a government. I don’t even know what you’re talking about with this zero-sum stuff. Do you want to abolish governments?

                Okay, let’s abolish the government. Now give me your house and all your stuff. It’s mine. I just formed Tony Corp. and my business is taking your shit for myself because there’s nobody around to tell me I’m not allowed.

                1. Collusion and monopoly might drive up prices, so let the government take half your income to “protect” you.

                  Sounds stupid.

                  1. I’m more concerned about the slavery.

                    1. As I assume we need a huge military because Hitler.

                  2. It’s how defense contracting is done. To ensure that we didn’t waste money or steal from the government, the government contract _required_ that we spend at least twice as much on bean-counters and quality inspectors as on the people doing the actual work. It required wasting 2/3 of the money to prevent wasting money.

                2. Would you even know how much google was hurting you with their free internet searches if Elizabeth Warren didn’t tell you that you were hurt?

                  Talk about manufactured crisis.

                3. Or try this (this is so fun!)

                  Ok Tony Corp, but first you have to get through Brian Corp.

                  Brian Corp. is an association of individuals who pool their resources to protect their rights , which they define as freedom from aggressive violence. As such, they do not engage in hostile takeovers, but primarily offer protection and security. Sure that sounds like a government. But, it’s a nice one, with very strict bylaws protected by very large supermajority amendments.

                  Meanwhile, Tony Corp is full of assholes. They actually work on the inside the way they work on the outside: it’s all rules and guns and confiscation. In fact, most of Tony Corp is human slaves responsible for maintaining their armies. Problem is, it’s easy to make a slave pull a lever in a factory, but it’s hard to make a slave cure a pandemic. Or invent a jet pack. Or make a shell that reliably explodes. As such, TonyCorp depends highly on numerical advantage in terms of manpower. It’s the “corporate North Korea”, so to speak, hoping the rest of the world is either likeminded assholes or very weak.

                  So, who will win? Do you want to be a nice person in Brian Corp, or an asshole in TonyCorp? Who do you think most people would want to join? How do you think most people want to live? And if they all did choose TonyCorp, then the justice in it would be how much they all deserve each other.

                  I like these mental exercises where we imagine things that will never happen!

                  1. “an association of individuals who pool their resources to protect their rights”

                    Good. We call those governments. You can use whatever term you like.

                    “which they define as freedom from aggressive violence.”

                    So your government is only permitted to exist as long as all of the people it governs agree on political philosophy.

                    Good luck with that bro.

                    1. I’m not really one to squabble about definitions. You can call it a government, but you called it a corporation before. Are they the same thing now? Who cares?

                      The important part is the principles it’s founded upon, not what label you give it.

                      There’s no requirement that people agree on my philosophy. They just have to go along with it to be in the corporation. If you’ll notice, that’s the way the world works right now, too. It’s just a much more reasonable way of going about it.

                    2. So when a child is born who grows up to question your cherished principles, what happens? Excommunicated? Executed?

                      I need you to explain how decisions are made in this philosophically pure society you envision, and what happens to people who disagree. Because I’ve had it up to here with fucking cults.

                    3. What happens now in civilized society if a child grows up and disagrees? Excommunicated? Executed?

                      Are these really your concerns? Issues that are incredibly simple to address?

                    4. They get to vote in elections when they turn 18.

                      You see the core problem. You want society to be run a certain way, and by all appearances that way doesn’t even appeal to 10% of the people you live around.

                      All I’m asking is specifically which form of tyranny you’re advocating.

                    5. I’m not advocating any tyranny at all.

                      I’m advocating that people stop being assholes.

                    6. “They get to vote in elections when they turn 18.”

                      Which changes the society they disagree with not at all, most likely, or else they would already be agreeing.

                      You act like “voting” is the only solution here, when it’s really not a solution to anything.

  40. Just like Putin’s Russia. A few big businesses in concert with government crush small business and the individual.

  41. Yellen is a bureaucratic hack. She is just another intellectually pliable progressive pied piper marching our country off a cliff.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.