On the 8th Day, The Bureaucracy Killed the Host

4Sep/0917

On the 8th Day, The Bureaucracy Killed the Host

Yesterday I received this email from monster.com - I was immediately struck by how obnoxious it was to me.

The idea that civil servants are in all ways protected from the ebbs and flows of the economy - completely separated from the harsh realities of the marketplace - is a source of not just a little animosity by yours truly.

recession-proof

In terms of the massive make-work stimulus bill, Wisconsin for her part gets 2 years of additional teachers and 2 years of additional cops on the street paid for with federal tax dollars (subsequent years to be paid with state tax confiscations). It is not lost on me that the teachers union stands to gain. It is not lost on me that the police union stands to gain. But in what way do additional teachers and officers stimulate the economy? The short answer is that they don't. They neither create jobs or wealth. And in doing neither, the increasing numbers of both do nothing for the state and federal coffers - except of course decrease them.

The shovel-ready projects are also hand-outs to unions, whereby only union workers benefit. Sure there is arguably some stimulus that may occur in terms of bolstering those who feed at the government trough - materials come to mind. But here too, there is no real wealth created. No long-lasting investment being made whereby one could point to an actual return on investment.

The auto industry is said to have been bailed out. But let's be clear: the government put forth the notion that too many jobs were at risk to allow the manufacturers to fail. However, the only jobs that have been 'saved' are line jobs - union jobs. Professionals have lost their jobs. And with the retail auto dealership closings, retail professionals have also lost jobs. And continue to lose jobs as each dealership is closed.

Something is terribly wrong with the common presumption that any job is a good job. It is simply not the case. Some are worthy of existing - some are not. Some are attractive and some are not. But mostly this is not about jobs, per se. Rather, the Government's objectives are two-fold only: the Executive Branch is busy paying back the unions - at the literal expense of all of us. And the Executive Branch in collaboration with the Legislative is also involved in the fleecing of America, both for political payback and personal gain. Somewhere, lost to those who cling to the philosophy that Big Government can do little wrong is the fact that the Government does not create wealth. The Government creates nothing. And without creating wealth, the propping up of jobs for the sake of employing people only exacerbates the first problem: namely no wealth in the private sector - the only sector that actually creates anything - and the only sector which, ironically, contributes to the "common good" in many ways beyond, yet including, tax revenue from flagrant acts of creation... services, products, wealth, sales tax revenue, increasing living standards, options, competition, opportunity, etc.

And here is the rub: a government and its benefactors - the bureaucrats, affiliated unions, etc - can only flourish - not just survive - when it still represents a small portion of the workforce. There is a point at which the government's sheer size makes it unwieldy and exceedingly harmful to the host it is bleeding dry. And like a parasite, there is a fine line between living off of and killing the host. We have, in my estimation, surpassed that point some years ago. the only thing you can count on when it comes to bureaucracies is that they never, ever die. Even when the host is clamoring for breath, they cannot stop their impulse to grow ever bigger - always taking more - always feeding - never sleeping.

So back to the email from monster. It is obnoxious to me. It reminds me that in this nation, one is better served, fiscally-speaking, to feed at the trough - and not just when hungry, but as a matter of course. And not just to sustain oneself, but to gorge oneself... to fatten oneself without consideration of where the money comes from, who is creating it, who is going without.

It's enough to make an entrepreneur put away his hard work and pick up a postal route. Or become a union teacher. Or a union assembler. Or become a DMV bureaucrat. Or run a publicly funded day care. Because no one is tending the cash register. And the drinks are on the house. And you wouldn't believe the fringe benefits and job security you get for doing next to nothing. Creating nothing. Contributing nothing. Advancing nothing but the self. At the expense of your neighbor. Like a rabid raccoon that just won't f*cking die already.

It's enough to wonder what exactly I was thinking. Idiot me had visions of investing in myself, taking risks, creating wealth, employing people (creating opportunity for others in the form of jobs), contributing to the tax-base, improving the overall living standards in my neck of the woods - all while offering valuable and needed products and services. Living and dying on my ability to offer the best possible for the price the market would sustain.

Who knew I was just a glutton for punishment? My recommendation to my kids is to get a government job - one where you can't be fired - won't be expected to perform - one that provides luxurious bennies unheard of in the private sector. One with a path to retirement!

snuff-a-bureacrat2

Oh to dream of the customer care I could get away with not providing. And you can even complain while you do it - about stress, understaffing, the scum you have to 'serve,' etc. But no worries the gravy train always comes on time. No one working for the government has been known to go without a paycheck. Ever.

Enoch_Root

Person with kids,a beautiful wife, a job. Catholic of the Latin Rite.

Website - More Posts

Tagged as: Bureaucrats, Creative Financing, Government Waste, Make-Work, Monster.com, Public Servants, Public Service, Quid Pro Quo, Scamming the Public, Stimulus, Unions Leave a comment

Comments (17) Trackbacks (2) ( subscribe to comments on this post )

HeatherRadish
September 4th, 2009 - 08:17

Itâ€™s enough to make an entrepreneur put away his hard work and pick up a postal route.

Good luck with that unless you’ve got family or sex partners already working there…

the private sector â€“ the only sector that actually creates anything

The one gov’t sector that creates things–by paying the private sector to do it–is Defense. That’s also about the only thing the federal gov’t is Constitutionally required to do. And of course, that’s the only part of gov’t being cut.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Enoch_Root
  September 4th, 2009 - 08:24
  
  good points.
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Carin
September 4th, 2009 - 12:04

My husband just moved his company, and we’ve come up against the fire marshal nazi from hell. WTF does he care what enforcement codes he demands? He has lost all perspective regarding how a business runs. Has anyone informed him that he chasing business OUT of his city? If we’d known, we’d have never moved here. It is a fucking nightmare. the cost for the system he wants us to put in is astronomical

Oh, and we’ve got two volunteer firemen working for us who say his codes are bullshit- codes he says are designed to keep his firement safe. If this building went up, firemen would NOT enter it. They do not enter pallatized warehouses.

I hope you see how this is related to your post, ’cause it is. I’m just tired right now.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- marianne7
  September 4th, 2009 - 12:09
  
  Regulation. The public thinks it has something to do with saving the world. Those of us who have seen it, it’s all about the payolla. ALWAYS get your business place okayed by the town BEFORE moving your business. Once you’re there, its MILKING TIME!
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Carin
September 4th, 2009 - 12:05

Oh, and one major company (in the same busines) moved OUT of the city due to it’s codes.

And FTR, we’re in an industrial complex, not in/near any neighborhoods.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Loki
September 4th, 2009 - 13:16

I know one of my dreams as a callow youth was to grow up and become a government drone.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Reed
September 4th, 2009 - 14:34

There was a time when government employees, especially those in non-essential or non-constitutionally mandated positions, knowingly and willingly sacrificed wages paid for their generous benefit packages and incomparabe job security…

Now though, we are in a whole brave new world, where legions of government minion are on the public’s payroll tending to the bloated bureaucracy assosiated with the inflated entitlement and social programs. And these employees are no longer underpaid, but on average make 30% higher salaries than their private sector counterparts…

http://boiseguardian.com/2009/04/13/government-workers-need-to-share-in-wage-cuts/

Couple this to the generous benefit and retirement packages, the inherent job security, as well as the fact that they generally recieve wage increases that are more generous and regular than the private sector, and it’s not hard to see how this contributes to the cost of goverment. And, by both directly removing bodies from the private sector labor pool, as well as through the concomitant taxation effectively removing the ability to add more productive jobs to the economy, it is easily seen how this effects the country’s overall productivity as well as economic output…

Many people who hold contrary views like to try and accuse me of hypocrisy, since I “enjoyed” uninterrupted employment during my years of service to our nation. To them I call BS, because the Constitution clearly calls for the Federal government to provide for the common defense; and last I checked the number of employees servicing the entitlement driven agencies, both in budget and number, vastly outnumber our warriors and the monies budgeted to defense related activities.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Edgell McHickfistter
September 4th, 2009 - 22:37

That’s a brave new stupid.

Your “couple this” was already coupled. If you don’t understand what you read don’t cite it.

We are a country of citizens and not citizens subordinate to privileged citizen warriors, ya self-inflated welfare queen.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Reed
September 5th, 2009 - 01:17

The article cited was merely one example; I think that my wording was correct, sir…

And I don’t see where I’ve implied that citizens are in any way subordinate to citizen warriors. In fact it’s the other way around, considering who pays soldiers salaries as well as the fact that the military as a whole is subordinate to civilian command…

Just how was I, or any of my bretheren privileged, outside of the pleasure of operating ultra-high-performance aircraft, in my own case?

And how is any monies I recieve construed as welfare, since I worked to earn it?

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Edgell McHickfistter
September 5th, 2009 - 04:05

You think your wording was correct? That you’ve no ability at critical thinking has been obvious for some time, but we’re talking basic reading comprehension. “Total compensation,” what might that include? Benefits?

From total compensation there’s no need to “couple,” Johnny Afterburner.

And your “non-constitutionally mandated” descriptor, WTF is that supposed to imply? Are school teachers and astronauts mandated in the Constitution, dufus?

You were paid – by the likes of me – to do a job, and I guarantee your job wasn’t to interpret the Constitution nor tasks requiring a philosophical grasp, herr rocket balls.

You’ve gone lunar orbital, moonbeamer, and your MSM jingo drumming is primitive and tiresome. Quacking as if you’re on the level with Chris “Tingle” when your not even in his ballpark’s parking lot, you need to add some stick’um to your grip.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Reed
September 5th, 2009 - 09:37

Gee edge, don’t you think you’re being a bit harsh?

I’ve read other articles that spoke of pay only, and others which spoke of total compensation; so I may have mixed the fillings for my BS pie. If that’s egregiously insulting to you, then I’m gentleman enough to apologie.

But I would point out here that since I was also speaking about the added benefits of inherent job security and regular increases in salary, regardless of economic circumstance, both of which are not part of any “total” compensation, that my use of the word coupled was more correct than you give me credit for…

AS for the “non-constitutionally mandated” descriptor, it means exactly what it says. The constitution directly provides for a standing army, but only by indirect extrapolation are mandates for school teachers and astronauts contrived. Not that either are unacceptable expenses, within reason of course, and as the peoples body keeps funding them, well…

You’re right though, I’m no Chris “Tingle”-thank God! I like to think of myself as more level headed and less hyperbolic…

And MSM jingo drumming? Does tha fact that none seem to have any interest in the ideological train wreck that is Van Jones even seem curious to you? Because if I were the suspicious type, I might be thinking they’re worried about more hits to Obama’s popularity because of Jones racist, hating, outlook. Kinda smells like confirmed media bias, once again, to me…

And I’ll never get why that seem to excite, upset, or insult you so much…

Finally, thanks for the compliment; but I’ve never had the pleasure of going orbital much less lunar orbital…

But I have gone ballistic, on your nickel too; and I can tell you it was a blast!

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
serr8d
September 5th, 2009 - 09:50

You were paid â€“ by the likes of me â€“ to do a job, and I guarantee your job wasnâ€™t to interpret the Constitution nor tasks requiring a philosophical grasp…

thor, you fat-assed semantically-idiotic piece of would-be-recipient-of-welfare-in-the-trailer-parks-if-not-for-trust-funds shit, wtf do you know about service to one’s country? It’s not just a job, it’s a commitment to service that might result in the loss of one’s life. That’s beyond the concept of just-for earning monthly pay statements (at least is was, until Bill Clinton started socially experimenting with the military).

You would do well to stick to philosophizing, in your case, philosophizing re: the continued use of McSoapHandFisting, your only area of ‘expertise’.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Enoch_Root
September 5th, 2009 - 09:53

Ahhhhh, he’s a Trust-Funder… ‘splains a lot. Need free money to fall for the special brand of retarded he espouses.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
buy valium no rx
September 14th, 2009 - 19:50

pacts validator nives reputable portable junagadh recommended limited chips training

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Ambien
September 14th, 2009 - 20:35

spendingas pdfall notify cash angell ecological commservci disabled ffff

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Belvedere
September 20th, 2009 - 15:54

Linked to at:
CLEANING OUT THE CACHE

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Audits
May 2nd, 2010 - 22:21

This information really saved me some time from all the scouring I would have had to do!

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )