[youknownothing]

There is a lot of philosophical manoeuvring here but a common argument is that governments aren't supposed to be so much efficient as effective. It's not about maximising use of resources, but maximising outcomes. Companies already provide the efficiency angle in society, governments are there to provide a counter-balance. If we try to run governments as companies then we might as well not have governments at all.

[jacob_harris]

I've heard of one professor summarizing it as "would you want to take an airplane flight that has only exactly the amount of fuel needed to get to your destination? What about if the fuselage didn't have any extra rivets? Really, you need more than one engine?"

Maximizing efficiency is a canard when government is supposed to be there as a backstop for disasters and economic downturns. Unlike businesses, governments can't choose who they serve as customers, and often have to be there for the neediest and most vulnerable. The Founders understood this (there are several states that call themselves Commonwealths for instance), but a strident faction has been trying to replace "we're all in this together" with "you're on your own, sucker"