Why you should be excited about national bankruptcy

Toll Road Booth

June 7, 2012
New York City

One of the great absurdities of our modern financial system is that a nation living within its means, i.e. spending less than what it confiscates in tax revenue, is no longer the norm.

Living within your means is now considered ‘austerity’. And unfair.

Whether in the UK, Europe, or North America, many voters have become so accustomed to the government’s massive role in the economy, they can’t begin to imagine how it could be scaled back.

You usually hear heavy objections from people like– “What about roads? If we start cutting budgets, there would be no more roads!”

The ‘road argument’ is one of the most widely misused defenses of government… as if there are no private roads in the world.

Chile comes to mind as a great example– the country’s very modern toll-based highway system is privatized, and the operators have a huge profit incentive to keep the roads in top condition.

In fact, the 2 1/2 hour ride from Santiago to our farm is along one of these roads, and it’s smooth sailing the whole way.

A few years ago when Chile had its major earthquake, portions of the highway system were damaged. This meant that the operators were missing out on toll revenue… so they found a solution and were back up and running in a matter of days.

It was amazing how fast they were able to pull it off when so much of their profit was at stake.

When you think about it, just about everything that government provides either is already, or could be, provided by the private sector. That there is presently a private vessel docked at the International Space Station in Low Earth Orbit is the finest testament to this concept.

SpaceX has twice succeeded in launching a vessel into space in its 10-year history with a total of just $1 billion in funding, averaging to $100 million each year… roughly 5.6% of  NASA’s massive budget.

Then there are things like the court system… where the wheels of injustice grind away at such a pedestrian pace that it can take years for a case to even be heard, let alone resolved.

Enter 21st century technology: there’s a relatively new service called Judge.Me, an online arbitration service whose decisions are legally binding in 146 countries, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe… and yes, including the US, Canada, and Western Europe.

At just $299, disputes can be settled in a matter of days, and the firm’s case history shows that 96% of all arbitration awards have been honored.

This is the sort of thing that makes me very excited– the private sector displacing the public sector. And there’s going to be a lot more of it coming.

The more insolvent governments become, the more they’re going to be forced to axe all the things they can’t afford. We’re already starting to see this in places from California to England that can no longer hide from their fiscal reality.

With the government monopoly out of the way, the private sector will mop up every service that it can turn a profit on– trash collection, security, fire, prisons, libraries, etc. This forces competition, higher quality service, and lower prices for everyone.

The people who protest against austerity, or think it’s a tragedy when a courthouse closes down due to budget constraints, are really missing the larger point: the sooner this corrupt house of cards collapses, the better off we’ll all be.

Get Fresh Updates and Build Your Freedom
Join 117,239+ subscribers and get the Notes from the Field newsletter with actionable information on how to build your freedom. Enter your email below to get started:
arrow 3 Why you should be excited about national bankruptcy

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • tfsteven

    Well this is all well and good in libertarian theory-land, but what about the main driver of our current and future deficits: a huge wave of old people living into their 80s and beyond? Is there a profit motive for private businesses to sustain the health care we’re used to providing our Oldsters without taxpayer funding and government regulation? Of course not. If there is a profit motive, it runs the other way toward taking health care away from old people, all of which have the profit-killing preexisting condition of being OLD. This is where the profit motive runs headlong into morality and our values as a people: we’ve made promises to Gramma and her generation that we must keep, and its going to bankrupt us. Health care for Oldsters is responsible for most of our debt. Where’s your free market solution?

  • http://www.bzemic.com/impossibleInstinct/ steve ward

    first are you following me around simon because i remind commenting on the roads yesterday lol, hmm the toll is a great idea as long as your not paying taxes on it as well

  • Sytallix

    Should every section of the gov be outsourced to the private sector?  Is it wise to have private, for-profit prisons? Or a for-profit police force?  Won’t we just see special interests from these sectors pushing for new laws, and longer prison sentences?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KVRYU4KN4OLOL3IEMHGPZTAUUM John

      Try reading the Constitution–the actual CONSTITUTION–not some liberal annotated version of it.  It was written in plain English, and each and every phrase was extensively debated.  The main problem is that succeeding generations of Lawyers, and judges, have weasel worded ways around the original meaning of the Constitution.
      There are certain things that are specifically Federal Government Powers, and specific things prohibited.
      The states can do pretty much what ever they want to do, but you have to remember, that in the states, you know where they live, and if it is that bad, you can go pound the windows out of their house.

      • Sytallix

         I don’t live in the US, nor am I American, so my understanding of the constitution is limited.  The reason why i said what I said is because here in the UK our police force is being privatized in some areas.

    • Mises’ Ghost

       The current “private prisons” still rely on taxpayer dollars and crooked judges to send them labor. Mostly it’s just a giant embezzlement scheme.

      Consider this: if you were paying a monthly bill to some security company, and they screwed you over like the US system does, would you continue paying them? That should answer any questions you might have about how corruption will be dealt with.

  • AbolishTheNWO

    Your point is great in theory, but you must take into account the continuity of government plans that have been planned for implementation after the collapse. Private mercenaries, foreign troops and drones just to name a few perils. Oh yeah, don’t forget the reeducation camps that are now admitted by the US Army.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KVRYU4KN4OLOL3IEMHGPZTAUUM John

    I’d love to have been able to use JUDGE ME, instead of the lawyer infested US court system.  I had trouble even finding a lawyer who had not already represented the proposed “defendant”.
    He screwed around for another 5 years stonewalling me, and changing lawyers, until he found one sleezy enough to figure out that since I only had estimates to repair what he had failed to do, I had no “damages” I could prove.  I work in the insurance business.  We routinely pay “estimates”. The guy could have made his brother, the installer, do the labor according to manufacturer’s instructions, and the wholesale cost of materials would have been under $2,000, and had a satisfied customer.  Instead, he chose to fight–changing lawyers 3 times.  I don’t know what his legal fees were, but it cost me $7,000.  Less than a year later, they went bankrupt.  While I was seeking estimates to repair my problems, competing dealers were not at all shy about telling me that they were not at all surprised about my experience with them, but they had either worked with him, or repaired things he had done.  Not only would they not have hired him as a salesman, they would not even talk to his brother as an installer.

  • http://www.facebook.com/glen.hale2 Glen Hale

    i.e. spending less than what it confiscates in, There  is  no  law you  have  to  pay  income  tax  ask the IRS for proof

  • ForrestByers

    I am all in favor of the total collapse of government monopoly and the reintroduction of personal liberty and freedom.  For those who insist on a continuation of the old monopoly system, I say, quit being lazy, sit down, and started use your brains, using creativity and imagination for all the various ways, that human beings might make a profit from one another. As you write down your list, you might take note of the beginning riffs of swelling patriotism which denotes the legacy of our forefathers.

  • Btothester

          Privatization is great IF you have ethical business men and women running the companies providing all of these services. This article is a nice thought in an America that was. Many of the founding fathers espoused the sentiment that our nation, our government, our Constitution, and capitalism itself will not and do not function without a virtuous people behind it. They saw these things as uplifting actually because they were supported and run by a good and altruistic people.
          As Americans we are becoming increasingly selfish, and do not help or think of our fellow men/women as better than ourselves. No social/governmental system historical or current can be sustained by a people like ours. And that goes for our current government and economy or ANY economy we could propose.

  • Mises’ Ghost

     I looked up the US on that site, and I noticed something. They have listed: “Fiscal freedom”, “monetary freedom” and “financial freedom”. Personally I wouldn’t consider any of their results to be particularly valid, the whole thing seems incredibly subjective to me. I wouldn’t have put the US under the top 10 under any circumstances (given that it’s bankrupt, the divorce laws, lack of personal freedom, state sponsored ponzi financial system and so on).

  • Debrajane

    Our greedy government passed laws where it could borrow from the funds of the Social Security System. Our government now owes the Social Security system three trillion dollars. Do you think our government intends to pay the Social Security System back? Hell no! They are deliberately trying to brain wash most Americans into believing Social Security is a handout to people who believe they are entitled to something they don’t really deserve. Those of us who have paid into the Social Security System all our lives feel that we are entitled to receive the benefits we have earned and paid for, but our government is trying to make people believe Social Security is welfare for the elderly or disabled; and it is not! They are trying to blame payouts of Social Security for the financial condition this country is in, which has nothing to do with our government’s inability to handle money.

    Our government passed laws that allowed immigrants that came to this country late in life, and to be eligible to draw social security benefits wether they ever paid into the system or not. A U.S. citizen, that was born and raised here, has to earn 40 credits before they can draw from Social Security at age 62. If they haven’t earned those credits then they can’t draw a dime, but an migrant can; even though they didn’t earn it. Then our government passed laws allowing illegal immigrants to draw, wether they can qualify or not. They passed both of these laws after they knew the Social Security System was in financial trouble. Who put them in financial trouble? Our government did, by borrowing and borrowing from the fund to the tune of three trillion dollars, and not paying it back. Now they would like to bankrupt the fund, so they NEVER have to pay it back!

    • John Galt

      I wonder if those ‘paying into the system’ have ever taken the time to do a calculation for what they’ve contributed and what it is worth at retirement.

      Hint: It is less than you think and less they you will end up collecting when all is said an done.

      I’ll do a little bit of remedial math for you folks of the Entitlement Generation:
      Assume starting salary 40 years ago was $35,000 (Yes, this is an enormous number for that time, but I am being generous assuming said participant was an above average college graduate with an extraordinary opportunity.) Assume the SS tax rate was 5% (No, it wasn’t even close to that amount back then, but this is just an exercise.) Assume said employee was entitled to 3% annual cost of living salary increase (No, that isn’t likely, but let’s give the person in question the benefit of the doubt.) Take that starting salary, multiply the 5% tax rate designated for Social Security and year one is $1,750. Things are looking good. Sadly, though reality sets in and in 40 years that person would have earned in total a mere $2.6 million and contributed only $131,952 to the program. Assuming mortality rates remaining consistent, there is at least 15 years with which to survive on that amount which equates $8,796 annual income, or $733 monthly income.

      Feel free to throw in some other manageable numbers to boost the total greater, but what you’ll come to realize using this cost-of-living calculation, the employee would have been earning $110,000 in his/her final year of employment, which is beyond reasonable.

Next Post:

Previous Post:

Read more:
Focus on Liberty
Small town stands up to growing police state

Close