But I doubt Bastiat ever said anything about governments being only a drain on the economy. He was much too intelligent to say such an idiotic thing.
Let’s look at NYC. In 1994 Giualiani took office and was followed by Bloomberg till a year ago, who largely continued his policies.
In those almost 20 years the city was completely turned around, going from one of the most crime ridden cities in the nation to among its safest.
Let’s just ignore the wealth created by giving people much safer lives to lead.
How much greater do you think the raw financial value of NYC as a whole is now vs. what it would have been had the politices of the former majors held sway for those 20 years? IOW, how much wealth did the two mayors create simply by doing their job well?
We will probably find out, as the present mayor begins disassembling the policies that made New Yorkers safe.
BTW, you don’t refute an argument by calling the author names. You have to show where the argument is wrong, not just let us know you dislike the author.
It is clear that you do not understand economics, Adam Smith, Frederic Bastiat, or free markets. I did not argue for a complete absence of Government, only that Governments do not generate wealth. What part of the western world’s debt problem do you not understand!?! I have no time for tired, worn out, keynesian arguments so troll somewhere else. ;-)