Let My People Go

I suggested, yesterday, that many of our government functions should be outsourced, but I didn't say much about which ones. I cannot leave the topic, however, without mentioning one role we could well do without, and whose absence could provide a series of benefits. Let me elaborate.

To be specific, it would be of great benefit to us all if we followed the British example from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. During that period they sent close to 175,00 convicts to Australia. Wouldn't it be nice if we could export the prison populations of both our Federal and State facilities. I'm confident that there is some country with a lot of extra land that could build facilities to house them, in a location not conducive to attempts to escape. And I suspect that our convicts could be accommodated for far less overseas than locally, even after factoring in travel costs. And how it would improve the atmosphere if there were no correctional facilities nearby. The entire NIMBY problem would be solved – at least as it applies to this particular assemblage of bad guys (and gals).

Additionally, we could pay a bounty to those prisoners who agree to stay away from our shores after release. Ideally, we'll let our people go and hope they don't come back. We might have to pay the recipient country as well, but since most criminals commit many crimes, their absence from our country would probably lower the crime rate and cut the cost of law-enforcement. There would probably be fiscal benefits far in excess of the money we'd have to offer the criminals and their new home countries. In addition, our streets would be safer and our law-abiding citizens would be more comfortable walking home at night. And other times, too.

There will certainly be cries of racism, since the prison population is not reflective of our population as a whole. And there may be the commission of new crimes by those who would like to go elsewhere and be paid to remain. Indeed there may be a swarm of illegal immigrants – especially from the countries that house our convicts – with the intent of having a bankroll to use on their release in their own country. These are questions with which we'll have to deal, but accusations of racism and illegal immigration are problems which we've faced for a long time.

It is also inevitable that the families of those who are incarcerated will protest that visiting is difficult or impossible. Perhaps we should export the entire family. With his family nearby, the criminal is more likely to accept the offer to remain where he is when his term is completed. Since anti-social behavior often affects later generations (whether due to Nature or nurture) there is a good possibility that future criminal activities may be avoided as well. That will lower future costs, an added benefit to current savings.

It will be a wonderful addition to the aggregation of tools to cut the National Debt. Now all we need is a way to export the debt itself.

[Happy Shushan Purim]

America – Land Of Enchantment

                                                                                                                       

(Another in the series of essays on balancing the budget.)

I recently had a problem with an appliance, so I did what the manual said and called the number for service. It was an “800” number so it didn't cost me anything except my time. Unfortunately the technician on the other end,ⁱ although he spoke English, had a thick accent and communication was a real problem. The tech was in Indiaⁱⁱ and the appliance company had farmed out its service. Outsourcing was far less expensive for them than hiring Americans to do the job. In fact, that procedure is quite common and saves a whole lot of money. And, as you know, in free enterprise, entrepreneurs are always looking for ways to save a buck.ⁱⁱⁱ

If outsourcing makes sense, though, isn't it time the government tried it? I don't mean in any kind of limited way, like printing our postage stamps. I have in mind outsourcing the majority of the US government. Before you dismiss this idea out of hand and make it a source of ridicule, hear me out.

One of the greatest expenses in any business or industry involves the salaried staff who perform the work. Not just their salaries, but their health care, pensions, vacations, sick time, and other fringe benefits. And they need a place to work. Usually it's an office building in an area where many of them live. That's generally an urban center with high rental scales. So that's another part of the cost of the bureaucracy – one we take on each time we establish a new set of regulations and a new bureaucracy to administer them. And, unfortunately, we do that all the time.

The buildings in which they work require maintenance staffs which adds to the expense. As do uniforms, laundry, maintenance materials, guards, and the like. Of course the employees will need conference rooms, cafeterias, toilets, and facilities to park their cars, and these will add to the rental costs.

Some learned economist will suggest that it would save money if the government built and owned the work facilities, however in addition to all of the expenses of renting, apart from the rent itself, the government would take on the cost of land and the various costs of building, including the construction crews and their expenses. And, of course, that includes fringe benefits, as well as what various groups – legitimate and otherwise – manage to skim off the top.

And the land and buildings will have to be removed from the tax roles – another of the costs of hiring people to run the government. But you have to spend money to save money. Of course you don't always save money. The government doesn't really know how to do that. That's a negative perspective though, and it's better to be positive. The government really knows how to spend money. I'm positive of that.

However our concern is saving money. And one way to do that is to outsource much of our government. There's no reason why most of our bureaucracy's charge couldn't be handled by men and women outside of our boundaries – in India, perhaps. For a single price – and with many departments we'd probably get a discount – a large amount of our work could be done without overtime costs or fringe benefits. They may not be perfect for the job – they may not know how to botch our government as well as local bureaucrats – but they'll learn. And we won't need service workers to help those employees, or buildings to house their efforts.

Certain functions would have to be retained, of course,^iv but those will primarily be those that are demanded by the Constitution, like defense^v and taxation. They're not our favorites, but our Founding Fathers gave us the responsibility for handling them.^vi They even wanted us to have governmental officials, like Representatives and Senators, however they had higher hopes for them than we do. In any case, no other country would want them, so we're stuck. I'll have more to say on that issue next week and after that I'll discuss a few other ways to save money and to enhance revenues.^vii

With the government lowering its employment roles there would be a temporary rise in the unemployment roles, but fairly soon wages would go down and private enterprise could afford to hire more workers. With lower wages, people would have to remain in their jobs longer before retiring, increasing American productivity and lowering Social Security payouts. The birth rate would also probably decrease making the cost of health care less.

And with a larger available work force we won't need to outsource as much, which will mean that more Americans will have jobs, pay taxes, and buy consumer goods. We're on our way to a healthier economy already.

[Happy Purim]

Next episode: “Go Tell It On The Mountain” – The rule of law.

i      He said his name was “Roger” but I suspect that that's not the name to which he answers when among friends. I'd guess that it's his nom de phone, imposed on him by the appliance manufacturer in the hope of convincing consumers that the service was local.

ii     Although it's not the focus of the movie, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” gives a glimpse at outsourcing.

iii    That's about 55 rupees.

iv     Delivering the mail in Keokuk would be difficult (but not necessarily impossible – see future postings) by a mail carrier in Mumbai.

v      We have the responsibility for our own defense so the military should be retained. We have, however, used mercenaries before and that possibility shouldn't be off the table.

vi     Many of our other activities were taken on by Congress or the courts because they thought it “right” (or politically expedient). The courts sometimes make up the law to suit their beliefs, even if there is no Constitutional basis for their position. Examples include Lochner v New York and Roe v Wade. Legal scholars question whether either has any basis in the Constitution, irrespective of the decision.

vii    Not just raising taxes, though that's a good start.