The Real Class War: Makers vs. Takers

How do entrepreneurs earn money? They see a problem and devise a solution. Through sleepless nights, they sketch business plans, build prototypes, and test markets. Presenting their idea, they hear “no” a hundred times. Nonetheless, they don’t give up. They risk their own savings, and more. They sacrifice their private lives to finally get a “yes.”

But at that point, their work has only just begun. They get up early every day to serve you and improve your life. It may take them a decade to build a relatively stable business, and even then, they still must serve every customer patiently. Bad press can destroy a good business overnight.

To survive, entrepreneurs must solve a problem over and over again. They must create and maintain an irresistible offer, constantly adapting to internal and external pressures.

And how does the government earn money? Much more easily: by force.

While private businesses must persuade you to part ways with your hard-earned money, the state has a simpler way: taxes. Government officials take a cut of nearly every aspect of your life: income, sales, purchases, investments, property, imports, exports, inheritance, and more. They charge you fees and fines. They take away your right to do things and then sell the right back to you in the form of a license.

Want to opt out? Good luck.

The entrepreneur must entice you; the official only needs the law. As far as the entrepreneur is concerned, you own your money—the compensation for the value you created. As far as state officials are concerned, they own your money. And if you peacefully refuse to follow the orders of these supposed “public servants,” they will imprison you. Keep resisting, and you may end up dead.

It’s a quiet form of legalized extortion—dressed up in bureaucracy and buried in paperwork.

The private sector creates wealth—free exchange and voluntary actions create all the riches of the modern world. The public sector redistributes it by compulsion—it grows wealthy not by producing but by coercing.

The founders of the first modern system of self-government under the rule of law—whose principles still shape today’s global political order—were well aware of the distinction between private and public spheres. Nonetheless, calls for increased welfare spending were already occurring less than two decades after the founding of the United States of America. James Madison stated his position during a 1794 debate in the House of Representatives:

Since then, the public sector has become far more effective at concealing its coercive nature. Taxes are deducted before your paycheck arrives in your account. Regulations are enforced automatically—overseen by smiling agents. The gun is kept out of sight—but always implied.

Yet people will seek alternatives to public services whenever possible. Consider the National Railroad Passenger Corporation of the US, Amtrak. Despite massive subsidies and legal monopolies, it is falling further and further behind private alternatives, such as intercity buses and budget airlines.

How can that be? Easy: Private carriers must serve you to survive. Amtrak survives with money taken from you by force.

Though this distinction may seem philosophical, it has concrete, real-world consequences. If I must offer value to survive, I will make sure to do exactly that. I am strongly incentivized to offer something that makes you willingly part with your money—to create a win-win exchange. If, on the other hand, I can take your money by force, why would I care?

We see this everywhere—just look at federal passenger rail service. Or have you ever been to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)? Exactly.

Coercive collectivist systems—whether called communism, socialism, fascism, or otherwise—have tried government-run food systems and housing. From the Soviet Union in the past to Venezuela in the present, we’ve seen how well that’s worked out—every time.

Additionally, officials are not subject to the market pressure of competition. If a private business doesn’t meet your needs anymore, you can simply turn to its competitors. If a government bureau doesn’t meet your needs anymore, there is no alternative.

Worse still, without unnecessary laws, many of those “needs” wouldn’t exist in the first place. Very often, the hurdles that government officials help you surmount are hurdles that government officials created in the first place.

As if taking part of your income by force weren’t enough, politicians then compel you to spend even more on subpar government services.

Some take this reasoning to its logical end—calling for the full abolition of the state. Others argue that a little government is a necessary evil. Whatever your position, we can agree on this: We should aim to coexist, with as little coercion as possible.

Public services are fundamentally backed by the threat of violence. That alone is reason to keep them to an absolute minimum.

Whenever a Javier Milei comes along and cuts the number of government employees, some are quick to point to the hardship faced by their families. “How will they be able to survive?”

There’s a simple answer to this: If your work provides real value, you will find another employer. If not, maybe you weren’t offering real value to begin with—maybe you were just a bloodsucker.

These same critics often claim that private employers grow rich off the backs of their employees. “Workers are just wage slaves.” However, if you feel your employer is exploiting you, you are always free to leave and seek better terms elsewhere.

Despite excessive regulation, the labor market remains largely free. You can choose your employer, and if a potential employer makes a poor offer, you’re free to reject it. If you genuinely believe every employer is part of a vast conspiracy to exploit workers, perhaps it’s time to test your theory—by starting your own business.

Leftists like to pretend that voluntary agreements between employer and employee amount to exploitation. Yet they call for an expansion of the state, overlooking the fact that public workers are paid not through voluntary exchange, but through money extracted by force. Which arrangement more closely resembles exploitation?

A truly moral business earns your money. Private enterprise must go to great lengths to serve you. The private sector grows by making lives better: more options, better goods, lower prices. Innovation propels us forward.

When the public sector grows, it brings with it an ever-expanding list of arbitrary requirements. It expands through taxes, licenses, fees, fines, and audits. Coercive authority is rewarded over service. Bureaucracy expands. Incompetence spreads. Corruption follows.

Only one system is worth building: The one where you decide who gets paid.