My real name

squashed:

Try something. Every time somebody complains about the evils or failings of “the government,” strike out “the government” and see what results.

Here’s an example from Sarah Palin’s WSJ editorial:

Common sense tells us that the government’s attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones.

Attempts to do anything often have undesired and unforeseen consequences. The statement contains an elegant caution against hasty action—but implicitly suggests that we need to set aside our fears of unknown problems in the face of known problems. Let’s try another, this time from Michael Steele’s:

Speaker Pelosi’s bill could also give government bureaucrats the power to limit or deny treatments, especially for seniors.

Bureaucrats currently have the power to limit or deny treatments, especially for vulnerable seniors. It’s a real problem, particularly when those bureaucrats are paid to find cost-savings rather than to promote health. Steele makes a solid point about how our structures desensitize us to individual need. But the primary difference between a private bureaucrat and a government bureaucrat is that the government bureaucrat’s stated objective is public service rather than profit maximization.

The right too often pretends that the  country consists exclusively of the government and small-business owners. Incentives get contorted in any institution where the people making decisions are not directly paying for them. This is a common and known problem. But unless we’re seriously planning on becoming a mythical nation of yeoman farmers, it’s a problem we do our best to deal with and move forward.