People sometimes waffle over whether government spending and centralized control should be cut way back, because things seem okay on the surface. There are still cars on the road, for instance, indicating that a lot of people still have enough money to drive around to where they want to go. It doesn’t “feel” like we, as a nation, are broke.
In the Oxford Companion to Politics of the World, there is a section titled Bureaucratic Authoritarianism (page 96 - 99), and much of it is devoted to the experience in Latin America. But under a subsection titled Demise and Impact, it is revealed that such top-down control leads to unsustainable debt:
“Third, severe economic problems, experienced through the region as part of the *international debt crisis, helped discredit authoritarianism.”
Because too may U.S. civilians have been waffling over whether government spending and centralized control should be cut way back (to levels not seen for over half a century), we are ending up like those Banana Republics which had to go through debt crises. In fact, we now have over $900,000 of total* debt per U.S. family:
*nonfinancial debt involves debt incurred for ‘things’ & excludes banks’ debt for ‘money’
If each of us were called to make good on our hypothetical share of the total debt held, then how many of the U.S. families would have $900,000 laying around — so that they could pay off their hypothetical share of it?
Evidence suggests that, to save ourselves, it will become necessary to demand smaller government: less government spending, and less government control. This means saying “no” to all of the planks of the Great Reset:
e.g., carbon credit system, digital ID, CBDC’s, control of healthcare, control of food, control of locomotion, 15-minute cities, etc. …
… and, instead, it means returning to the government levels which we had prior to 1958, when government regulation was sparse and unobtrusive, and when total government spending (green line below) represented less of GDP than either business profit (blue line) or total wages paid to all workers (red line):
We simply cannot continue to have the government represent the lion’s share of GDP.
Though the color scheme of the lines above was by happenstance, in both 2020 and in 2021, the government had “crossed a red line” — i.e., it had gone too far — and had become the primary economic actor by way of allocating more total resources than any competing group (such as the 161 million American workers getting paychecks).
History proves that such a command economy — where the government is the predominant “consumer” — is not feasible, but more Americans need to wake up and begin to demand that the government downsize by spending less money and doing less things and controlling less things. Like Reagan said, government is the problem.
Reference
The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780195117394.001.0001/acref-9780195117394