Posted on 08/07/2012 7:20:58 AM PDT by HenryArmitage
Since the official end of the Great Recession, America's public sector has shrunk. And shrunk. And shrunk some more. We've said goodbye to about 600,000 government jobs, handing the economy a nasty self-inflicted wound in the process.
But how small has our public sector really become? Here's one way to think about it: Compared to our population, it hasn't been this size since 1968. Your dreams are coming true Baby Boomers. We're almost all the way back to the Summer of Love!
First, credit where it's due. The Hamilton Project has produced a beautiful graph illustrating the government employment to population ratio. As it shows, there are now fewer public sector employees per American than at any time dating back to the Carter administration (To be clear, we're talking state, federal, and local here). ...
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Automation allowing a smaller group of leaches inflict more damage?
In 1968 banks still closed on Wed Afternoon to balance. Cows got milked by hand. Pick ups had shifts on the column. In what way is this number from ‘68 a useful reference point ?
“Compared to our population, it hasn’t been this size since 1968.”
GOOD! A small step in the right direction.
A total lie! Total BS!
I guarantee that when liberals talk about less “government workers”, then area ALWAYS talking about less military personnel. So when they cut the defense budget, less soldiers equals less government workers.
A total lie! Total BS!
I guarantee that when liberals talk about less “government workers”, then area ALWAYS talking about less military personnel. So when they cut the defense budget, less soldiers equals less government workers.
Good point. The comparison should be civilian workers. Also, the comparison should be inflation adjusted non-defense dollars.
Per the link below, total gubmint spoending, as a percent of GDP was:
2011: 40%
2010: 41%
2009: 43%
2008: 37%
2007: 35%
2006: 35%
2005: 35%
2004: 35%
2003: 35%
2002: 35%
2001: 33%
2000: 33%
1999: 33%
1998: 33%
1980: 34%
1970: 31%
This talking point is completely bogus, and only points to the fact that government pay has outpaced the rest of the economy, if there are in fact fewer workers.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_2011USpt_88ps5n
The author’s point is irrelevant. If you cannot pay for services without going into additional debt then you are still too big.
a good response. thanks for the link.
Here’s the dirty little secret about the civilian Government workforce.
I’m sure that the size of the civilian Government workforce HAS shrunk over the years. That is always a politician’s favorite talking point at election time.
However, the work still needs to be done.
The Government’s solution is to replace Government workers with contractors. Therefore, the Government pays the (often higher) contractor salaries for the workers, pays for another layer of managers (also contractor) and pays for the profit margin of the contract.
Therefore, the politicians get to crow about how the Government workforce has been cut, but the cost (to the taxpayers)of the Government doing business continues to rise!
Since it doesn’t seem to specify, I’m guessing it includes local and state government employees as well.
1 - With computers and the Internet, one regulator can impact 100 times as many people. For example, zoning. It used to be the county zoning folks had to drive around and look for a possible violation. Now they sit at their computer and look at aerial photos. And with the zoning people I’ve run in to, it doesn’t matter if you’ve complied with all zoning laws. They want to know if you bought a permit from them - which in my case ran about $300 for a corral made of panels resting on the top of the ground.
BTW - I got my permit before doing the work. But it took me 4 hours, because a guy staring at an aerial photo insisted I needed a new survey. After 4 hours, I was lucky enough to encounter a guy in the office who had visited the site a month earlier (just before I bought it). He assured the first guy that no survey was needed. If I hadn’t stayed for 4 hours, and lucked out by running into someone who had been there, I’d have needed to pay over $1000 for a survey acceptable to the county.
2 - Much of the Federal government is no longer involved with governing, but in transferring wealth. It takes people to build a road. It takes a computer to monitor your pay and deduct money to give to someone else.
3 - If I want to start a business, how much red tape will I encounter? Do the regulations take up 4 feet of shelves, guaranteeing I’ll violate something somewhere and be subject to fines or delays?
Also note that the influx of illegals adds to the general population numbers, diluting the percentages of government employees. By their account, by failing to secure the borders they're reducing the size of government.
What do you call 600,000 bureaucrats at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start.
yes if you go to the actual article via the link, i believe the last line of the story indicates it is from all levels of gov.
Same productivity gains that the private sector has undergone except it took an economic calamity for the government to make cuts. It’s not like they wanted a smaller government,it was forced on them.
More Czars (who never went through Congressional confirmation) than ever before.
Obama lies, so does the Pravda Revisionist History media.
Everyone on the dole is a PAID gub'mint employee.
When all costs are considered, the cost of Govt vs contractor are negligibly different.
But — you can fire or get rid of a contractor on a moment’s notice. You can end a contract tomorrow (termination for ocnvenience) and lose a lot of contractors all at once. Try firing a Government employee - impossible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.