Captain Creeper
Diamond Member
- Oct 13, 2025
- 2,320
- 2,732
- 1,903
Early in our nation’s history, our representative form of government was conceived of as one where people would essentially donate their time to serve in a legislative or executive capacity. Because one of meager means probably could not afford to be away from their trades or professions for extended periods of time, this largely limited people in public service to those who could afford financially to do so.
This effectively limited public service to those individuals who had actually accomplished much and succeeded in the private sector. Thus, valuable world experience, discipline, and other tools necessary to the service were assured. A young bartender, for example would not to serve because (1) he/she could not afford to, and (2) he/she did not possess any meaningful skills or competency, and (3) he/she really had nothing of any value to offer.
It used to not pay anything to go into public service. Those who went into it would experience a substantial drop in pay. In addition, they would only serve so long until they had to get back to their chosen profession or trade. Thus, this system provided for built-in term limits.
Nobody was supposed to go into public service as a career. Judges would serve the longest. But even with judges, the understanding used to be that they went into judgeships because they were not good enough lawyers to make any money in the private sector.
We all know what happened, however. Public service became a career. Today, many people enter public service, from elected positions down to bureaucratic jobs, because they can make more money there. Think about that. They cannot make any money in the real world, so they go to work for the government. This explains a lot about today’s government. Add to this affirmative action and DEI programs and public service is nothing but a welfare system for people who cannot make it on their own.
The most infuriating aspect of public service is where people enter the public service on one level financially, then become very wealthy while in public service. This phenomenon is not limited to Congress and the Executive branch. People today like Comey, Jack Smith, etc… They get obscenely wealthy in public service.
These people then stand around applauding each others’ “selfless public service”, as if they somehow sacrificed something to serve. In reality, if they were worth a damn at what they did, the private market would pay them handsomely for their work. However, merit is applied; if they do not do well, they are fired or demoted. Why put yourself through that when you can go work for the government, make a ton of money, and exert a fraction of the effort required by the private sector?
The term “public service” has become perverted today. What these people do is SELF-SERVICE, not public service. And this sector has grown with the ever expanding administrative state. Everyone wants in on the gravy train.
Some of these people probably could succeed in the private sector if they were willing to put in the effort and work in a merit based system. But why do so when you can get super wealthy in government work? This largely means one thing: lazy people who want something for nothing.
I do not begrudge everyone their government jobs. There are, in fact, government jobs that must be done. I limit my critical comments to the so-called “public service” sector. These are subpar people, generally and of every political ideology,
If your entry into public service results in your (1) receiving higher pay than you can earn in the private sector, and/or (2) results in you accumulating an outlandish amount of wealth while allegedly serving the public, then you do not belong in public service. We are not getting the best, most experienced people for public service if it results in a pay raise. Rather, public service folks should enter the sector already with a wealth of experience and skills, and then move on after a reasonable period of time.
Trump, along with much of his cabinet, is a private sector success. This is a very big reason why I like him. Dems usually are usually the SELF-SERVICE types.
Finally, by professionalizing public service, we know have a certain power concentration in government that the Founders would have frowned upon. We have the deep state and the administrative state now running large portions of our everyday lives and not a single one of them is elected.
This effectively limited public service to those individuals who had actually accomplished much and succeeded in the private sector. Thus, valuable world experience, discipline, and other tools necessary to the service were assured. A young bartender, for example would not to serve because (1) he/she could not afford to, and (2) he/she did not possess any meaningful skills or competency, and (3) he/she really had nothing of any value to offer.
It used to not pay anything to go into public service. Those who went into it would experience a substantial drop in pay. In addition, they would only serve so long until they had to get back to their chosen profession or trade. Thus, this system provided for built-in term limits.
Nobody was supposed to go into public service as a career. Judges would serve the longest. But even with judges, the understanding used to be that they went into judgeships because they were not good enough lawyers to make any money in the private sector.
We all know what happened, however. Public service became a career. Today, many people enter public service, from elected positions down to bureaucratic jobs, because they can make more money there. Think about that. They cannot make any money in the real world, so they go to work for the government. This explains a lot about today’s government. Add to this affirmative action and DEI programs and public service is nothing but a welfare system for people who cannot make it on their own.
The most infuriating aspect of public service is where people enter the public service on one level financially, then become very wealthy while in public service. This phenomenon is not limited to Congress and the Executive branch. People today like Comey, Jack Smith, etc… They get obscenely wealthy in public service.
These people then stand around applauding each others’ “selfless public service”, as if they somehow sacrificed something to serve. In reality, if they were worth a damn at what they did, the private market would pay them handsomely for their work. However, merit is applied; if they do not do well, they are fired or demoted. Why put yourself through that when you can go work for the government, make a ton of money, and exert a fraction of the effort required by the private sector?
The term “public service” has become perverted today. What these people do is SELF-SERVICE, not public service. And this sector has grown with the ever expanding administrative state. Everyone wants in on the gravy train.
Some of these people probably could succeed in the private sector if they were willing to put in the effort and work in a merit based system. But why do so when you can get super wealthy in government work? This largely means one thing: lazy people who want something for nothing.
I do not begrudge everyone their government jobs. There are, in fact, government jobs that must be done. I limit my critical comments to the so-called “public service” sector. These are subpar people, generally and of every political ideology,
If your entry into public service results in your (1) receiving higher pay than you can earn in the private sector, and/or (2) results in you accumulating an outlandish amount of wealth while allegedly serving the public, then you do not belong in public service. We are not getting the best, most experienced people for public service if it results in a pay raise. Rather, public service folks should enter the sector already with a wealth of experience and skills, and then move on after a reasonable period of time.
Trump, along with much of his cabinet, is a private sector success. This is a very big reason why I like him. Dems usually are usually the SELF-SERVICE types.
Finally, by professionalizing public service, we know have a certain power concentration in government that the Founders would have frowned upon. We have the deep state and the administrative state now running large portions of our everyday lives and not a single one of them is elected.
