- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,695
- Reactions
- 18,742
If the aim is to measure the size of the government workforce then I'll argue the most accurate way to consider it, in terms of serving the intent, is to count all jobs funded by taxes and not to count any jobs funded by the sale of something on commercial terms in the market.
It's a technicality to argue that a road maintenance contractor is "private enterprise" when the work's being done at the request of government, on a government owned asset, and 100% of the money's coming from taxpayers. To say that's private might be true in a legal technicality sense but not really in the spirt of what's intended, every one of those workers is funded by taxation in practice. All it really is, is the privatised Public Works Department but it's still taxpayers paying for it.
In the other direction if something's owned by government but is self-funding from the sale of services to willing purchasers, having no access to taxpayer funds, then it's not really part of the public service in the manner intended. Taxpayers aren't funding it even though government owns it. Especially so if it's set up as a standalone shareholder owned corporation, the only link to government being that it owns the shares.
So I'll argue that it's workers funded by taxpayers, regardless how technicalities of how they're employed, that's the most relevant measure.
It's a technicality to argue that a road maintenance contractor is "private enterprise" when the work's being done at the request of government, on a government owned asset, and 100% of the money's coming from taxpayers. To say that's private might be true in a legal technicality sense but not really in the spirt of what's intended, every one of those workers is funded by taxation in practice. All it really is, is the privatised Public Works Department but it's still taxpayers paying for it.
In the other direction if something's owned by government but is self-funding from the sale of services to willing purchasers, having no access to taxpayer funds, then it's not really part of the public service in the manner intended. Taxpayers aren't funding it even though government owns it. Especially so if it's set up as a standalone shareholder owned corporation, the only link to government being that it owns the shares.
So I'll argue that it's workers funded by taxpayers, regardless how technicalities of how they're employed, that's the most relevant measure.
