The Repair Subsidy Trap: Fixing Toasters or Funding Greed?

 

The Repair Subsidy Trap: Fixing Toasters or Funding Greed?

London is currently flirting with a "Right to Repair" scheme that sounds like a green dream: 50% off your electrical repairs, funded by the taxpayer. The goal is to stop us from tossing out slightly wonky kettles and to save the planet from electronic waste. It’s the kind of "circular economy" rhetoric that makes bureaucrats feel warm and fuzzy. But as any student of human nature—or basic economics—knows, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and government vouchers.

History is littered with the corpses of subsidy programs that backfired. When you inject "free" money into a specific niche, you aren't helping the consumer; you’re ringing the dinner bell for the merchants. As Milton Friedman famously noted, the most efficient way to spend money is when you spend your own money on yourself. You care about both the cost and the quality. But when the government steps in to pay half the bill, the repair shop has every incentive to inflate their base price. If a repair used to cost £40, and the government offers a £50 subsidy, suddenly that repair costs £90. The customer pays the same, the shop gets a windfall, and the taxpayer gets fleeced.

This is the dark side of the "nanny state" business model. It assumes citizens are too dim-witted to value their own belongings unless a politician dangles a coupon. In reality, the reason we don't repair things is that manufacturers—the ultimate high-tech primates—design products with "planned obsolescence." They make devices impossible to open without proprietary tools. A subsidy doesn't fix a broken design philosophy; it just creates a parasitic layer of middlemen who learn to harvest government funds. If the GLA really wanted to help, they’d get out of the way and let the market punish manufacturers of unfixable junk, rather than trying to bribe us into fixing what was designed to fail.

---

The Great Australian Heist: When "Public Service" Becomes a Private Club

 

The Great Australian Heist: When "Public Service" Becomes a Private Club

History teaches us that the closer you are to the printing press, the fatter your wallet becomes. Milton Friedman famously noted that the most inefficient way to spend money is spending "other people’s money on other people." But he missed a nuance: spending other people’s money on oneself is the pinnacle of bureaucratic evolution.

The latest Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) report in Australia was supposed to be a lecture on social justice—a way to shame the private sector into balancing the scales between men and women. Instead, it accidentally pulled back the curtain on a far more cynical reality: the Australian federal government has created a "Bureaucratic Aristocracy" that makes the private sector look like a charity ward.

Take the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC). Their lowest-paid 25% of staff earn an average of $137,000. To put that in perspective, that’s nearly double the national median income. In the halls of the CEFC, being "bottom of the barrel" puts you in the top 10% of the Australian workforce. And don’t even get me started on the Future Fund, where the top quartile earns an average of $560,000. That’s not a public service salary; that’s a "lottery winner" stipend, funded by the very taxpayers who earn five times less.

The excuse is always the same: "We have to pay market rates to attract talent from investment banks." Yet, history shows that when the state begins to mimic the excesses of the market without the market's risk of bankruptcy, you are no longer a government—you are a protected cartel. The Albanese government boasts of low unemployment, but they conveniently forget to mention that a huge chunk of that "growth" is just the public sector cannibalizing the treasury to hire more of their own.

When the Romans started paying the Praetorian Guard more than the legions, the Empire’s days were numbered. Today, we don’t have Praetorians; we have statutory authorities with 15.4% superannuation. It’s the ultimate business model: zero competition, infinite funding, and a workforce that gets paid more to regulate the economy than the people who actually build it.