I'm interested in the discussion that
Matt Yglesias has been having: that the consequence of major cuts in spending is that government will do fewer things. Is that how you understand it? If not, why is that logic wrong? If so, what are some significant things that government does now that you don't think government should do at all?
That is how it should be. I doubt it will work out that way.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the government should support the income of farmers and the ethanol industry. I don't think it should pay for houses that are below sea level to be rebuilt. I don't think it should offer insurance for property built next to the coastline. I don't think the US government should pay for the defense of wealthy countries that are capable of paying for their own defense like Germany, Japan and Korea.
I don't think the government should be in the mortgage business either by offering loans directly or by giving guaranties to private or semiprivate entities.