2 votes

Dear Dr. Paul. I have a burning question.

Dear Dr. Paul and community. I have been following all of this for the past 4 years. I've been trying to educate myself on everything everyone posts. My question is this.

With The United States suffering massive job loss, if we cut so many departments from the budget, with what would all those government workers replace their employment and benefits with? Where will all the new jobs come from? How long would it take? What should we expect for public reaction during the painful events to come from abolishing so many government jobs, and programs that keep other company's in business as well?




Like this article? Get DP delivered to your inbox daily. Subscribe here:

E-mail address:  

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Corporate Taxes

One thing to keep in mind is that the removal of all corporate taxes (as Paul rightfully refers to as an additional consumer tax) would prompt a massive corporate hiring wave across the nation.

Combine that with the reality of a nonexistent IRS and a once-more valuable currency, and our economy will be like a rocket at blast off.

It will be painful for a while, at first, but well worth the end results!

"He did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it." - John 3:17

"Well, you know it's like I always say 'it ain't government work if you don't have to do it twice.'" - Jerry Gergich

Shadowstats.com numbers show 20% of GDP gone

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/gross-domestic-pro... numbers show 20% of GDP gone since 2000 and 40 of 41 quarter of shrinkage (negative growth).

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts Likewise unemployment is topping 22%.

So it makes sense that we can afford 20% less government with 20% less productive economy.

Demand a 25% across the board of cuts from this year's federal budget, with a future goal to limit of government to 15% of GDP.

Free includes debt-free!

The intent is not an immediate wipe out of these Departments

It would be quite safe for an employee of, say, the IRS to plan a vacation in the coming 6 months, even the coming year. Are people actually so naive to believe that we would eliminate these agencies and programs without understanding the impact of their elimination?

While it may be in our best interest (thanks to the 3 constants of governmental agencies: waste, fraud, and abuse) to wake up tomorrow and find that the FDA is no longer a functioning entity, it still does serve a purpose.

Any agency or program we have heard to be earmarked for elimination (Please, God! ANY and ALL of them!!!) will be phased out over a period with a replacement plan in place there for their vacancy. Bottom line: a transition from corrupt, wasteful federal agencies would take place to something more effective and those people most affected by these programs would know plenty in advance what will happen and when the doors close on these money pits for good.

IRS Gone!

California Debate 2007

Mod: Dr Paul, would you get rid of the IRS?
Paul: Immediately!

Any questions about whether or not Dr Paul has put much thought and research into this subject, and "understands the impact of eliminating" this particular agency?

Anyone here ever read Reagan s Grace Commission Report?

IRS Agents won't have trouble finding employment in their field. Conducting a full audit of the Fed, Ft Knox, and most of the federal departments is gonna require people with their kind of experience. :)

May this dream

come true.

The proper role of IRS agents...

ought to be - instead of snooping through the finances of private citizens; over at the Fed crawling up Bernankes boxer-shorts with a flashlight

My Answer

Government programs exist because the intent of the organization has a justifiable purpose. The DOE intends to educate, the DHS intends to secure the homeland, and the EPA intends to protect the environment. Therefore, in a free society, the advancement of education, security, and environmental protection would shift to the private sector. This is where creative and intelligent individuals would dedicate there capital resources for the interest of serving a demanding marketplace.

The most competitive government workers may end up working for its private sector equivalent. I would assume the private alternative would not be as large, but that is not for me to determine. The marketplace is responsible for deciding what businesses fail, which succeeds and when. If we prop up any faulty organization for the sake of delaying the inevitable, then our problems are just going to become much worse

The people can be receptive if you reach them in the right manner. We like being told what we want to hear, but we also respect the truth. If you make a definitive argument based on fact and historical perception, then people have to say yes. People can only be willfully ignorant for so long.

i agree for this one simple point...

When private companies get caught for fraud they get the full punishment of the law. In a bureaucracy they get promoted for failures. Prime example is the failures on 9/11 and FEMA.

We have a better chance against private companies instead of govt. Plus.. private companies don't have prisons, guns and the ease of neglecting their sworn oath.

Hahahahhahaha... seems unless we have principled judges that uphold the rule of law we are screwed anyway.

System needs a reboot named Ron Paul. Only under his leadership could we expect the rest of the bureaucracies to FOLLOW HIS LEADERSHIP. The problem is leadership has been corrupt for so long its now the status quo and those that challenge it are the radicals!!!

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

oops

Forgot to mention the fed and bailouts.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

80% of the jobs in the United

80% of the jobs in the United States come from the small business private sector of the economy.

The remaining 20% consists of big corporations and government jobs.

Do away with the DHS, DOE, and TSA...and what will result?

Real job creation, and lower taxes.

End the income tax, I'd hire someone immediately.

You know what's wrong with having so many government jobs? Nobody produces a product to sell. The don't make anything, besides a paycheck.

Too many $$$ chasing too few goods and services (jobs)....INFLATION by its definition.

Want to put a temporary stop to inflation? Allow businesses to hire more people by ending the income tax, and dare I say put a Federal Cap on State sales tax.

I just forked over about $4,400 to the New York state sales tax revenue collection system. I do that EVERY THREE MONTHS!!! I always wonder to myself, "what could I have done with that money to help grow my business?"

This quarter alone, I would have taken that money and purchased a new 3 door cooler/refrigeration unit that is made in the United States. It costs about $3,400 tax included.

With the extra $1,000 leftover, I'd buy a new flatscreen television for the restaurant.

By cutting taxes and eliminating government jobs, you will create a DEMAND for said purchases above.

And instead of buying products to help grow my business, I might just take the $4400 and invest that money in a new employee that will help me BUILD AND CREATE A PRODUCT.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

OR.... I would take that

OR.... I would take that $4400 and go on a vacation for the first time in 15 years!

That would be a nice vacation. That would be a really nice new 3 door cooling unit...that would be cool to install a nice new flatscreen TV....that would be very cool to hire a new employee....BUT, BUT, BUT....

Albany knows how to spend my money best I guess.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

Wasn't it Reagan..

Wasn't it Reagan who cut 3000 Federal jobs resulting in 1 million job expansion in the private sector?

I think I remember reading somewhere that 1500 private sector jobs are created for every federal regulator terminated.

Govt jobs don't create wealth

your under the idea that Gov't jobs spend money that create wealth. But that never bothered me. Govt jobs only consume they don't create wealth. They had to take money away before they spent it. Govt depts are not profitable, that is why they are not called for profit companies. Private companies are for profit. They create profit. They create wealth and the whole country gets wealthier. Govt consumes, it's nonprofit, actually it is negative profit by nature so the whole country gets poorer. Are we poorer now or richer? That is an easy question to answer. And the solution is even easier; less govt spending, more private profits.

Thank you guys!

This is why I love this community (inspired by Dr. Paul). You've recommended things to read. You've given me educated answers I can digest and research.

Please continue to do what you know is good to inspire others to see the world in a positive light. I'm a believer in freedom and personal responsibility. I was raised by immigrant parents who came here with nothing and have accumulated wealth through honesty and hard work.

Although they know nothing of Ron Paul, ..Ron Paul speaks on behalf of the way they've raised me, which is why he resonates with me, as do the rest of you.

Work hard, be kind, be honest, don't mooch, love everybody and never open someone else s fridge with out permission.

Hah !! ... That's easy ....

Those Government employees will go to work for the people that actually create the jobs in this country (entrepreneurs and small business owners) .... AND ... they'll finally have to work for a living, instead of making $46.75 an hour sitting on their ass regulating, taxing, monitoring, and oppressing the rest of us.

Ron Paul 2012!!!

The money doesn't disappear

It just get reinvested in the private market, which is more productive than being spent on a government job.

You gotta read, "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt

He explains it there, in very easy-to-understand terms.

This may be the most important book you read this year. It's a classic and should be mandatory reading for everybody who loves freedom and yearns for truth.

It's been 20 years since I read it, and I should read it again (and will!), but the gist is this:

1) Gov't jobs destroy private sector jobs. But nobody ever talks about those jobs. Think about it, if you had $1,000 dollars and the gov't stole $400, then you have $400 less money to spend. If you had spent it, you would have bought X, Y, and Z.
2) The companies that make X, Y, and Z never got your money. So that means the gov't job CREATED unemployment in the private sector
3) Furthermore, a lot of the bureaucrats are directly engaged in regulating (read, "reducing profits and increasing unemployment) private industry. So the unemployment is hit negatively TWICE.
4) Now multiple that $400 x millions of people, it literally adds up to BILLIONS of dollars "stolen" from the economy.
5) Furthermore, gov't bureaucrats are unproductive (they don't produce anything AND they are inefficient at what they do as there is no accountability), so the ratio is probably something like "for every gov't job created, it destroys 5 private sector jobs".

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

You beat me to it, but here's the link to the online text.

Economics in One Lesson
By Henry Hazlitt

http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/

Chapter 9 deals specifically with the question at hand.

Disbanding Troops and Bureaucrats

http://www.tinyurl.com/Econ1-ch09

There would be temporary

There would be temporary short term pain but all those people will eventually find new opportunities.

Think about all the smart and creative minds going to waste working for the government... (I'm sure there are some) Those minds would be put to productive use instead of being wasted on worthless paper shuffling government jobs.

Many people would have no choice but to become entrepreneurs and create jobs for others.

We would have a much stronger economy if more people were participating in it.

Some things might be unknown

But I'd rather 'leave Egypt' and give it a try than stay 'in bondage.' We'll figure it out. There could be a whole let less consumption for one thing. Our time could be spent in a much smaller local for another. My freedom is actually more important to me than a job.

As it stands now, everything is kept secret from us, Monsanto is poisoning our food, fluoride poisons our water, our nature is being destroyed, HAARP is operating at their own will with no regulating, corporations polute, money barons commit fraud daily, DNA is being tampered, super soldiers are being lab grown, we mostly don't have a clue what all is happening.

Jobs--with honesty and integrity, we could rework our infrastructure, grow healthy food and clean up our environment, take care of every human on earth to keep them healthy. Your question is so shortsighted that it blows me away. I'm sorry, but life is so much more important. We have a ton of catching up to do once the patents are released. I think the jobs would turn right around, no matter how many we fire in the government. The struggle will be to keep integrity in the system because so many of us are crooked. The judges need to be fired. The lawyers--ugh. Drug companies, corporations, monopolies, they all need to be cut down to size and put into a workable description.

Maybe there shouldn't be as many jobs;

if 40% of the population is not pushing useless pieces of paper around more people could stay home. Or well whatever they want?

I work in a resort. Other then weddings, all the conference business is gov't related. Often they could have the meetings in a large office.

you have a point

maybe one of the parents can now stay home if there were less jobs, and actually raise the children, instead of letting teachers and day cares instill their values.

Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down.
-- Frederick Douglass

They would simply perform similar jobs in the private sector.

Many gov't jobs are jobs which the gov't co-opted from the private sector to begin with.

But then there are the worthless gov't jobs, which definitely would take a hit.
Perhaps those people could go to job re-training courses for burger flipping or something, like they tell the unemployed private sector people to do.

The truth is the people who lived off the gov't doing worthless paper shuffling jobs will be out of work.
There is no guarantee, or even any likelihood, that worthless paper shufflers will get good paying jobs anywhere.
Perhaps they should have saved their money when they had it cushy as a tax-eater.
Otherwise, not my problem.

Welfare at all levels would need to end

and be returned to the private sector. People would need to do what humans did for the last couple thousand years, work to survive and do something productive.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

The Granger's picture

Work; Work, everywhere, but not a job in sight.

We the people do not need a huge tax sucking government to provide jobs. This government actually stops job creation, and here's how:

The job of a chef, the person needs culinary training (govt subsidized trade), out west, they MUST speak Spanish, must have a HACCP ($90) certificate, tuburculosis test, and those documents go to the EPA ($250) to get a license to work.

Now, let's take the three government jobs out of this equation, and answer your questions with the chef in mind.

The government workers have options. They could form companies that compete to be better EPAs or HACCPs than the Govt they came from, which is not doing well with all these food illness breakouts. I don't think the "Seal of Good Housekeeping" went away, it continues to sustain, and so there would be, many more consumer security businesses.

Benefits could come from joining existing groups, like The Grange (where Grange insurance once dominated the USA), without government jobs, we have competition on the private market, which creates jobs and benefits, as PEOPLE are free to negotiate, instead of paying for services that are not working, but instead hurting us.

What would we expect? Frankly, as the home garden movement and sustainable energy movements develope, I see green building, more Habitat for Humanity, Charity/volunteerism in the future, which a great popularity for alternative medicines as alternatives to pharmaceuticals, and subsidies.

Seems to me, the pain is now in waking the MSM brainwashed out of their "American Dream", they awaken with FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real). I live in a very rural area where I depend on a Volunteer Fire Department. We could not afford to have a government run fire department, so instead, we have a fire department that is made of friends. Some of the most skilled firefighting humanitarians who absolutely respect private property we are blessed to have on hand. We can safely cut the middleman (government) out.

STAND WITH RAND 2016

Dependency

My take on this situation is that of dependency. I liken it to a teenager living at home. You turn 18 usually you have to find your way in society. Every Year young folk leave the roost and find jobs. Sometimes they learn they cannot live above their means. Sometimes they have to settle for something they might not enjoy. But the hard work, if diligent and thriftiness has its rewards. Some of them become entrepreneurs who hire people and create an income for another family. But the government does not create wealth, it steals it from you and me.

Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down.
-- Frederick Douglass

These government workers

These government workers would find productive jobs or become entrepreneurs. Government jobs are not productive!

There are no easy solutions

If I overspend for years and run up debt until I go bankrupt then I can't expect to keep my house and my car and continue my life as before.

I must go through some serious readjustments. I may lose my house and I may have to work double hard to get back on my feet.

The same is the case for a country that goes bankrupt.

We could work hard to get back on our feet or we could just declare bankruptcy and start again. And then work hard to get back on our feet. There is no free lunch.

Who do "we" owe all this "money" to? Central banks around the world mostly and all their banking institutions.

Who is this "we"? Did you decide for the Government to spend all this "money". Did you get any benefits from it?

"We" are free people and we are not responsible for anything the government does. That is their problem. They are bankrupt.

The Government is like IBM or McDonalds. If they get into trouble they have to decide what to do.

The Government is not like IBM or McDonalds.

If the Government gets into trouble, they raise taxes to cover their losses. (Usually by debasing the currency. Most people don't think of deficit spending as a tax, but it is.) McDonalds does not have this option, or the police and tax collectors to enforce their demands.

I very much like your sentiment:

"We" are free people and we are not responsible for anything the government does. That is their problem. They are bankrupt.

But then, I'm an anarchist. If you don't believe government is your "rightful ruler," and you deny your personal obligation to pay whatever taxes they demand of you, then am I right in thinking that's your bottom line, too?

Recommended reading: The Most Dangerous Superstition, http://www.amazon.com/Most-Dangerous-Superstition-Larken-Ros...

I didn't explain myself very well

My point was that we are not the Government. If IBM came and told us what to do we wouldn't accept it. IBM have their rules and that is fine if you work for them but for the rest of us their rules don't apply.

The same is (should be) the case regarding Government rules and regulations. I was born as a free person, so why do their rules apply to me? I didn't make them up, I never agreed to them, I don't benefit from them and no other less fortunate persons benefits from them either. It is all designed to keep us enslaved and misinformed while we work for the elite.