Smart Government is Big AND Dumb (on the left and right)

Big government or so called "smart government" (as progressives are beginning to prefer) is a slippery slope ... because by definition big / smart government (of the progressive left) allies itself with "labor", and thus it makes promises it can't possibly keep to labor --or if it does keep them, the promises are clearly unsustainable and unaffordable.  

 See the bloomberg article copied below describing France's new socialist government's decision to REDUCE retirement age by 2 years for those who began work at 18 years old!!! 

To be fair, the political right has the same deep and fundamental problem with self delusion.  the right also claims its "big government" military industrial complex can be transformed into "smart / small military" as well. 

but any way you slice it, "conservative big government" requires a massive military industrial complex and hawkish foreign policy that leads to constant war or preparation for war (cold war) and thus drains the treasury and impoverishes society. 

Remember the neocons including Rumsfeld talking about smart war and 21st century military -- streamlined, much cheaper to finance and technologically sophisticated (in the lead up to the Iraq War).  the quick collapse of Iraq and the capture of Baghdad by US military in just days had neocons clapping each other on the back for an inexpensive and decisive victory according to a new smart war doctrine.  But the "victory" proved illusory, just as all big government victories eventually prove illusory (no matter whether we talk about foreign war or domestic wars promoted by the right or left respectively.)

Both sides promise "smart" (rather than BIG) government because BIG governmetn has a negative connotation.  But is smart government even possible?  i argue smart government is an oxymoron.   Smart government is elusive and ultimately unattainable, because it ultimately promises free lunches that are impractical in the real world we live in where social outcomes cannot be engineered by government and where democracy cannot be injected into foreign lands at the point of a gun -- no matter who well intended.

Progressive smart/big government is the Great Society fantasy, which has come in many different shapes and sizes for 200 years.  Great Society programs always begin with great fanfare and optimism before they ultimately crumble on their own self contradictions.   this is because smart government still means the same thing as Big government:  permanent mobilization of government to fight domestic wars against poverty, inequality and FOR social justice.  government grows no matter whether it is successful or not in achieving its aims.

the idea that we can fight wars smarter (and thus on the cheap) is a fantasy.  if we fight a war, let us at least admit the massive costs associated with the war, no matter if the war is a so called "just war" or not. 

Foreign or Domestic war mobilizations are bad enough (that is I mean, big/smart govt of the political right or left is bad enough), but together they are certain disaster for society as we saw in 60s and again since early 2000s -- and as we've seen play out through world history, including with the fall of Roman empire which went broke (morally and financially thanks to debasement of the currency).  rome was forced to debase its currency in a final desperate attempt to fund the unfundable:  ie. simultaneous mobilizations of both foreign and "domestic wars" (i.e. welfare programs).  we are engineering virtual currency debasement thanks to the Federal Reserve and the mainstream inflation targeting framework elites have implemented in order to finance and ensure they remain elites and the poor remain poor.

when society attempts to combine big government of the right with big government of the left -- as we had in 1960s and 1970s with Johnson's great society experiment + Vietnam war and as we have repeated again with GW's wars and compassionate conservatism -- put on steroids by Obama (who has cut military but expanded safety net and exploded the deficit!!!) what we get predictable social, moral and economic disaster.  The disaster comes because war mobilization directs national resources into unproductive activities, which eventually improverishes society.

It is easy for either the political left or right to disassociate itself from the French govenrment's recent move.  neither side in the US is dumb enought to do that!!!  (reduce the retirement age for social security).  But that is beside the point.  Both the political left and right, the Dems and GOP are apologists for Big government any way you slice it or whatever you call it, progressive or neocon or whatever. 

Governments who come to power on war mobilization promises (for either domestic or foreign wars) end up sowing seeds for self fulfilling prophecy and domestic public financial disaster -- and gradual impoverishment of society.

whether you are a dedicated member of the political left or political right, do not fall for temporary shadenfruede regarding the insanity of the socialist french government.  both the left and right in the US are doing the same exact thing only with much more clever and non transparent methods and sophsticated rhetoric.

-----Original Message-----
From: DANIEL GARDELLA (FREIMARK BLAIR & COM) [mailto:dgardella@bloomberg.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 1:16 PM
To: Sam Baker
Subject: wow!! (TEL) French President Francois Hollande Cuts Retiremen

wow!!    (TEL) French President Francois Hollande Cuts Retiremen

t Age

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

French President Francois Hollande Cuts Retirement Age

2012-06-06 16:39:32.907 GMT

Emma Rowley

     June 6 (Telegraph) -- France's new socialist government cut the country’s retirement age in the face of the eurozone’s deepening crisis, citing “social justice” to explain a move that goes against austerity efforts across the region.

     Workers who entered employment aged 18 will be able to retire at 60 rather than 62, under the decree agreed at a cabinet meeting on Wednesday.

     The decision follows pre-election promises from the new president Francois Hollande to reverse the rise in the retirement age introduced by his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy in 2010.

     At what age do you expect to retire?

     “We committed to put this measure in place quickly for social justice for those who started working early,” said Social Affairs Minister Marisol Touraine.

     The reforms will cost the state billions of euros a year but can be afforded through higher worker and employer contributions, according to the government.

     The €1.1bn (£890m) annual cost up to 2017 - €3bn thereafter

- will be met by a 0.1 percentage point rise in payroll charges, amounting to an extra €2 a month on the average monthly French net salary of €1,600, it said.

     Around 110,000 people are expected to benefit from the measure in the first full year.

     Jean-Francois Cope, leader of France’s conservative UMP party, called the policy move “madness”.

     “It risks the downgrade of France’s credit rating and at this rate tempts fate,” he said.