Slipping Away

Nobody on the road
Nobody on the beach
I feel it in the air
The summer's out of reach
--Don Henley

Two factors drive ongoing improvement in a society's standard of living. Saving facilitates accumulation of capital stock, which is essential to increasing output beyond what is possible by manual labor alone. Innovation combines resources and technologies in novel ways that increase value.

Both of these improve productivity, defined as the quantity of output derived from a unit of input. Because inputs, or resources, are scarce, society is better off when more output is realized per unit of resource. Individuals achieve higher standard of living through increased real income, expressed in terms of purchasing power.

Due to ignorance, greed, arrogance, or other reasons, people often fail to recognize the adverse effects of bureaucratic interventions on the two primary drivers of standard of living. Consider, for example, these two government programs:

a) Increase corporate taxes. Often, the stated goal is to redistribute income from businesses to individuals, particularly low income earners.

b) Supply side economics. Made 'famous' by the Reagan administration, SSE essentially amounts to cutting taxes with no commensurate decrease in government spending (in fact, spending nearly universally increases). To make up for the revenue shortfall, government must then borrow and or print money (it usually does both).

Reflect on how these programs influence societal savings (capital stock accumulation) and propensity for innovation.

Once you have reasoned it through, then test your thesis with relevant empirical evidence, such as US economic data sourced from the past 30+ yrs during which the above government programs have been particularly active.

Well reasoned, intellectually honest thought produces but one conclusion about the relationship between bureaucratic intervention and societal standard of living.