September 2, 2013

Failed Government Programs

I don't mean those that didn't deliver 100%, nor those that delivered a barely perceptible effect (like Dodd-Frank). I'm talking about the ones that made things WORSE.

Here's my list, feel free to add on:

ADA (Americans with Disabilities); Wiki article cites how it's decreased employment opportunties;

McCain Feingold - "let's get the money out of politics!" ooh yeah,

ADC Aid to Dependent Children - hurts, as do arguably all the war on poverty programs

Affirmative Action - hurts

Brings to mind Murray's law: The less likely it is that the unwanted behavior will change voluntarily, the more likely it is that a program to induce change will cause net harm

There's an article here, methinks. It spins off Romney's comment about Government picking Winners & Losers, which seems to lead them to always pick losers. This makes perfect sense, of course; only losers need government, and Government needs to be needed. Think on it; does Apple need government? No way! (well, they could use help with antennas...) Solyndra, Enron, GM need gov't. Where there aren't enough losers, the gov't steps in and lends a hand.

Posted by nanobrewer at September 2, 2013 12:06 AM

There is a book out, now I remember....

http://www.amazon.com/Thats-Not-What-Meant-Consequences/dp/0393048845

Posted by: nanobrewer at September 2, 2013 12:36 AM

Methinks you're too kind to Dodd-Frank. Grading on a curve today, are we?

Posted by: Jk at September 2, 2013 7:21 AM

Thanks, Chris and Barney! stimulating the pawn shop sector by destroying consumer credit. Way to go.

Posted by: Jk at September 2, 2013 3:43 PM

Department of Education.

Posted by: johngalt at September 3, 2013 1:15 AM

Eff Dee Ay.

Posted by: Jk at September 3, 2013 8:26 AM

Ethanol!

Posted by: jk at September 3, 2013 10:41 AM

Is it too early to put the ACA (affordable care act) on this list?

Posted by: dagny at September 3, 2013 1:00 PM

It's never too early, Dagny - early and often is called for, in this case.

The list of government agencies and programs that actually delivers on its mission and stays within its bounds would be far, far shorter, methinks (name any three, not counting the military, I triple-dog-dare you). But then, what would be the fun of that?

Posted by: Keith Arnold at September 3, 2013 1:24 PM

Is it too late to put the ACA on this list?

I might reverse directions on brother ka. Rather than enumerate the swell Federal entities, I'll take a whack at the military.

Yes, it's an enumerated power, yes is important, and yes I still have "Support the Troops" license plates on the Mister2. But the military overspends and exceeds its mission (Corps of Engineers maintaining NOLA levies? Rilly?)

I think we can follow nb's magnanimity and grade on a curve. The military is worth it. I would say the same for the Federal Courts. Ninth-circuit brothers may not be completely on board, but these two remain my reason's for not going all Murray Rothbard on y'all.

And the White House tours -- oh wait...

Posted by: jk at September 3, 2013 1:53 PM

I sooooo want to respond to your Rothbard with Lysander Spooner and suggest the Post Office...

FEMA, FDA, TVA, Education, HHS...

Say it with me, friends: TSA. If I want a full body massage, I'll pay for it elsewhere.

Homeland Security. DEA. BATFE.

Can I take a whack at The Fed? Yes, we all know they're not a Federal agency, but The Fed deserves a good beating.

At least George Orwell stopped at fewer, but the Federal bureaucracy didn't have to go and take 1984 as a blueprint, did they?

Posted by: Keith Arnold at September 3, 2013 2:21 PM | What do you think? [10]