Cost of government vs value of government

Too many people complain about the cost of government and the level of taxation, but they never look at any actions of government being investments.

Where would they get enough educated workers without government-provided schools?  Would enough parents or individuals have the time or money needed for the level of education required by many businesses?

How would they get the roads to move goods from manufacturer to warehouse to user?  Would they want to pay tolls for each segment of road, including local roads.

What would our health be without food inspection?  Maybe the food producer thinks regulations are burdensome, but what about the burden on employers who have many employees absent with food-borne illnesses.

Maybe factories think safety regulations are burdensome, but what would their costs be in reduced workforces and lawsuits?

The basic question is shall we have a society of maximum gain for a few or a society that provides for the “general Welfare” as stated in the Constitution.

Or, too many people know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

For a much better consideration of this, see “Our mismeasured economy”, Lew Daly, New York Times, 2014-07-06.

Legislators must prove they have read the books

I have had on my to-do list for awhile to write a blog entry about a standardized test for legislators.  After all, if a standardized test is good enough to judge school children's abilities, a standardized test should be good enough to judge legislators' abilities.

I was prodded to act on this to-do item on seeing "Teachers must prove they can do the math", Rachel E. Stassen-Berger and Kim McGuire, Star Tribune, 2012-02-23.  Gov. Mark Dayton signed a law that "requires would-be teachers to pass a college-level basic skills test before they can lead a classroom."

So, again sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.  Shouldn't we have a requirement that legislators pass a political history test before they can serve in a legislature?

Here are a few questions:

What did Adam Smith state was the basis of a nation's economy?

Was Adam Smith concerned with special interests?

Was Adam Smith more sympathetic to workers or to employers?

Did Adam Smith think that banks should be regulated?

Were the writers of the Constitution concerned with the common good and virtue?  Please define these terms and give examples of their use in the Federalist Papers.

To what degree did the writers of the Constitution think that commerce should be regulated?

What was the intent of the writers of the Constitution when they used the words "people", "person", and "citizen".  Please define each term.

Did Thomas Jefferson think that "limited government" applied to financial institutions and other corporate interests?

Please feel free to send these questions to your legislatures at the state and federal level.

Adam Smith was pro-labor

The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily: and the law, besides, authorises, or at least does not prohibit, their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work, but many against combining to raise it. In all such disputes, the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, or merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks, which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year, without employment."
- Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter VIII, Of the wages of labour
What he describes is not a free market.