Well, okay. If you live in a place with a "failure of government", do you wait for the government to get fixed? Until then let them eat cake?
Of course not. But neither is it all or nothing; slum or safety net. My point is the root cause needs to be explicitly identified before it can be rectified. The root cause in this case is America's fetishism for small government and smaller taxes.
(And just to be pedantic, historically there's also spoils from conquest.)
There's also government debt. I know you could argue that this has to be paid back eventually---but when interest rates are below inflation, that's a better than free loan. (And in theory they could invest in assets that yield even more, instead of just consuming the difference between inflation and interest.)
Most people buy government debt out of their own volition even at these low rates. (And if it's foreigners buying it, there's even less direct coercion via regulation involved.)
Why do you think anything with a government stamp is automatically 10x the price? It's not because of people wanting smaller government. Smaller government is about localizing procurement down to the smallest workable level.
Making a huge tender to build these environmentally safe houses for everyone would mean only the biggest and most expensive companies could compete in the 10 year long bidding process. Making a tender for 10 houses for the local poor in your village would be free in comparison, and those 10 houses would be ready before the poor die of old age.
In general, yes. But not in the best run governments---Singapore comes to mind.
(But even Europe isn't quite as bad as the US. American public procurement---especially for infrastructure projects---is truly hideous and expensive by global standards.)
The Swiss seem a good model if you are looking for how localized government can work.
I don't understand why that is. We paid ten billion dollars to replace the SF Bay Bridge, and it took forever. Now we're going to spend seventy billion for a train that goes from nowhere to nowhere, and very little is actually going toward construction itself.
Is it the cumulative effect of regulations, or the price of labor, or corruption? Something else?
There's some special American factors. One is that your population, and by extension the lawmakers they vote for, don't trust the bureaucrats at all, and thus make try to micromanage the public servants with laws that remove discretion. These laws are intended to remove opportunities for corruption, but they also remove opportunities for common sense.
For example, in most of the US they have to award public contracts to the lowest bidder---no matter how likely the awarders think the lowest bidder is going to overrun schedule and budget.
I've read a bit about these problems (and my summary above is from memory). Even lurking on HN, this topic comes up from time to time in the comments.