U.S. Government shuts down.

[kandrathe]

You're free to believe the tax burden is too high. I don't think it is - in international comparison, the US is very low, lower than any comparably rich country, at 27%. If it was 50%, you'd be Denmark.

Federal. Federal. Federal. But we also pay State, County, locality, sales, service, and excise taxes.

If we go with the tax foundations calculations, 108/265 is close to 30%. The average(middle middle class) US citizen has about 1/3rd of their earnings taken from them. You'd need to be above average, in the 4th quintile (upper middle) in order to be taxed at the 50% or more overall rate.

Then also, in my mind, I don't think we want to be comparable to Denmark (where the avg. tax is 35%). When I think of entrepreneurial growth, I don't think Denmark. I'd rather be comparable to Hong Kong. I think Denmark would be a place that would be comfortable to retire in, but the winters may be too cold.

But I don't see what this has to do with indebtedness. If you're worried about government debt per se, rather than just trying to dismantle the welfare state (such as it is), you'd be in favour of higher taxes to improve the fiscal balance, no?

No. I'm in favour of a higher savings rate, and allowing people to keep more of their income. In general, I think people know better how to spend their own money.

In the OECD then, for savings rates, I wish we were more like Switzerland.

When government gets bloated at all levels, like it is in the US, they take our money away an spend it on what bureaucrats find politically expedient mostly for short term political gain, which is heavily influenced by special interests.

If instead, we allow people to choose how to spend their own money, then only the necessary things get purchased. And... I know this is a vast oversimplification, and as we've discussed numerous times, there are some things that the government is best to do. But, I feel there are many ways in which we can trim out the stuff is less important, or would be better served by the private sector, or more locally. It's not an all or nothing proposition. This is the difficulty in having a healthy diet, or system of taxation. Once you get a little sugar, you want more. Only self-discipline, vigilance and frequent self assessment (on a fair scale) prevents one from getting obese.

We could even look at Obamacare. Why did it cost Minnesota billions of dollars to implement it? We didn't and don't have a problem with vast numbers of uninsured. We'd have been better off just giving everyone of the small % who were uninsured a voucher for free insurance.

But, the states that do have vast numbers of uninsured (like Texas) are avoiding it, they are not implementing it, and cannot afford to enroll their low income people in the Medicaid portion. But, here, we are forced to pay more to resolve a problem we don't have. Beyond that, the additional tax on medical devices threatens the livelihoods of thousands of our citizens.

Another question for you... Private industry over the past decade or three, through the application of technology and process efficiencies has had record increases in productivity (more work, less workers). Why has government gone the opposite direction? We are spending more on government (40% of GDP) as if the same productivity curve did not apply to them.

Hasn't it? How are you measuring output productivity of government workers?

Services provided (hours worked) over what population growth (recipients).

The amount and type of work that "government" does is not fixed. You need a labour productivity measure.

How about these?

Plus, I think you're thinking of manufacturing. Productivity improvements in services have been much more muted.

Not really. Non-manufacturing uses computers too, but maybe not so many robots (the jury is out though on whether there are robots in the government). US corporations have moved to a model of very slim upper and middle management, elimination of clerical positions, and most everyone else becoming a specialized information enabled worker in the trench. I know in my roles over the past decade or two, many examples of where a handful of people are doing with higher productivity, and quality what used to take 20 or more people to do.

There are some professions where this productivity doesn't scale as much when hands on time is the service, like say military, policing, teaching, fire fighting, or in some cases health care. Most of the non-military Federal government is administrative, and not hands on. And, as I understand it, most of the military is administrative too.