Feb 2, 2018

Someone should do something about me being so fat

The creep of government services is out of control, writes Toby Ralph.

Toby Ralph

Marketing consultant

UK Prime Minister Theresa May has just announced a “minister for loneliness”.

With millions having no friends and seeing nobody for weeks, loneliness is unquestionably a serious problem, but is government the answer?

Government and its evil twin, tax, grow constantly because we increasingly outsource our problems and responsibilities to them. Once a service is established it becomes an expectation, it is extremely rare to remove one, but commonplace to see calls for more services and thus greater expenditure.

As national debt surges toward half a trillion dollars, and government spending continues at around $100 million more that it collects through tax every day, perhaps it is time to reconsider the role and scope of government, and our expectations of it. Government has three jobs: to establish and implement rule to encourage people to be fair to one another; to manage greed so we play nicely together; and to provide essential services.

If you believe that rights belong to individuals rather than being the gift of governments, then you’ll readily accept that people should be able to do what they want as long as they don’t hurt others. But if I want to practice archery in the city it may put you at risk, so we need government as referee to set rules, and manage them through the police and an independent judiciary. While often imperfect, our system is pretty good at this: government largely sells what we want to buy

Greed management is trickier. Human behaviour generally drives the species to get as much as we can, for as little as possible. Wealth creators and business owners often want to keep the prosperity they create, loafers want to sit on the beach and have others pay, and there are thousands of positions on the grey scale between these extremes. We use elections and governments to sort out how much to take from one, and how much to give to the other. History is littered with bloody revolutions or flights of capital when that balance is improperly calibrated.

A broad rule might be that the fortunate and capable many should provide adequate support to the unfortunate and incapable few. This would seem to imply that nine out of ten people should contribute more tax than the benefits they receive, in order that someone else is supported, but the reality in Australia today is that only two in ten contribute more than they get, while the other eight get more than they kick in.

This seems way out of whack.

The reason this give and take seems unbalanced lies in the third job of government: provision of essential services and more specifically the scope creep of what is done.

Expectations of what governments must provide have not just seen federal taxes and debt grow like a toddler on steroids, state and local bureaucracies are at it too. When someone sells an average house their state government puts its hand out for around $50,000. It’s got no relationship with service provided, it’s a straightforward mugging to fund other promises we vote for.

Essential services are commonly thought of as things like health, law and order, education and rubbish collection, but governments are also in the business of giving grants to businesses, first home buyers, and community puppet theatre troupes.  

Government pays for infertile people to have children, spends billions on overpriced submarine building in marginal electorates, props up collapsing manufacturing plants, squirts fortunes at inefficient energy schemes, pays organisers to arrange conferences here, appeases squeaky-wheel protest groups that endanger political tenures, and endows vast subsidies to filmmaking, transport, solar installations, opera, breeding, and much, much more.

We increasingly outsource our problems and responsibilities to government, and correspondingly their price goes up and up, the evident link being frequently ignored when we vote.

Disengagement from the cost consequences of democratic decisions has created a system that charges processing fees for bribing us with our own money.

Doctors have been lobbying for obese people without health insurance to have free lap band surgery, implying that society should take collective responsibility for individuals who are fat.

Now fixing loneliness has joined the list of potential “essentials”.

When government takes on a problem like loneliness, committees are set up, policies drafted, laws created, services costed, departments funded, staff engaged, and tax or debt raised. Lonely people are identified as victims, unwanted solitude becomes abuse, and social interaction a basic right.

Do we really want to increasingly abrogate personal responsibilities and choices, and pay more for government to provide the social infrastructure of our lives?

What will we see next? A Minister for Lovelorn Teens, a Ministry of Anger, or Inappropriate Sexual Desires? Are Fun or Happiness basic rights? Should we have a Department of Angst?

How about a Minister for Government Overreach instead?

*Toby Ralph is a marketing consultant. If you don’t know what that means send money to [email protected] and he might send half of it back.


Leave a comment

13 thoughts on “Someone should do something about me being so fat

  1. LeoDiG

    Did anyone actually read this article before posting it? Or is this a very refined dose of satire that has somehow escaped my comprehension?

  2. AR

    Seriously? Two out of ten pay for the other eight, ie ..everything?
    I have an idea for Crikey articles from the good olde Gore Hill ABC studio enclave, when there was a Programme Prevention Officer, whose sole purpose it was.
    Good, golden daze.

  3. Marcus Ogden

    Did someone stick the wrong byline on a Peter Chudd piece?

  4. paddy

    Sheesh Crikey. Times must be pretty tough in the bunker, when you’re reduced to publishing Toby Ralph’s attempts at satire.

  5. Justin Thyme

    >Toby Ralph is a marketing consultant
    Stick to marketing. Leave humanity to the rest of us.

  6. Linda Connolly

    Toby Ralph is self-avowedly totally amoral & utterly for sale, why would anyone listen to him on any issue pertaining to how to conduct a decent human society?
    QUOTE: “I’ll work for anyone who pays me. I’m a taxi: flag me down and I’ll take you wherever you want to go. “I’m appalling but at least I know I’m appalling.”

  7. Peter Hannigan

    I think the British Minister for Loneliness is misunderstood. Given the pressures Theresa May is under and the relationship with her colleagues, loneliness would be a serious issue. The new Minister is probably obliged to talk to the Prime Minister – maybe even say nice things to her occasionally.

    Perhaps Malcolm Turnbull would like one.

    1. Matt Hardin

      Funniest thing I’ve read all day, Peter.

  8. Befuddled

    “Wealth creators and business owners often want to keep the prosperity they create” This must be some other country he’s talking about – Oz is full of property spivs & marketing consultants.

  9. wilful

    There are interesting things to be said about the roles of governments in the 21st century, and whether they should be inexorably expanding. This article isn’t a useful contribution.

    1. Damon

      Exactly, Wilful. The closest Ralph gets is a bit of “anecdata” with his conclusion: “We increasingly outsource our problems and responsibilities to government, and correspondingly their price goes up and up, the evident link being frequently ignored when we vote.”
      Instead of evidence of this “link” we get I guess what marketers like to call “common sense”. Or something.
      Less of this, please, Crikey.

  10. wendlee

    Great article. It is definitely the direction we are going and worthy of thought.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details