Liberals challenge the service state indirectly through fiscal-scare arguments rather than openly

Evidence

Liberals have now joined fiscal conservatives in challenging service provision. They do not do so directly, by questioning whether public services and responsibilities developed in this century are appropriate. Instead, they do it backhandedly, arguing that the accretion of public employees and their apparently irreversible demands upon revenues threaten the autonomy, flexibility, and prosperity of the political order. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 103

Categorization

• QUESTION: Does the public-service union control over working conditions (ch5 claim) feed these ‘irreversible demands on revenues’ arguments? This offers the fiscal bridge between union power and retrenchment discourse.
• XREF: connects to: Fiscal savings claims mix genuine gains with rhetorical relabeling of cuts — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 1816; Neoliberal crisis responses deliberately undermine state fiscal authority — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 49; The liberal funding anxiety hardened into austerity doctrine by the 1920s — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 270

Broader Connections

• The liberal funding anxiety hardened into austerity doctrine by the 1920s #expands (0.85) — Mark Blyth, Austerity, 270
• Neoliberal crisis responses deliberately undermine state fiscal authority #expands (0.78) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 49