In effect, Jonah Goldberg is complaining about the dangers of redistribution in the least redistributive first world nation.
Well, he's at least warning of the dangers of redistributing more and ceasing to be the least redistributive / most competitive.
If you ask a conservative to name a country that provides as many quality services for less, or more and better services for the same price, they can't name one. If they do, encourage them to start packing their bags. Sure, they could save a lot of money living in Mexico.
Well, in terms of certain types of taxes, most of Europe provides better for less and they certainly provide more for the same levels of taxation. They lack the American economy's dynamism and ease of getting filthy rich. They not only could save a lot of money in Mexico and Monaco, they do. Many millionaires avoid the US completely, from the off, and choose Mexico instead, so they never have to deal with the IRS or the tax obligations of US citizenship. It may have downsides, but many still do it, never mind Belize, Panama and the Bahamas, to mention only the near neighbours.
As Leo McGarry often said, America can never provide more for less, because it's spending half of all federal money on having the Pentagon defend most of Europe and Asia from aggressors and being the only part of NATO worth having.
But my main point is that in wanting smaller government, we don't want "as many quality services for less", we want no services for nothing. Leftists just never seem to get their head around the idea that if the government doesn't do it, but there is demand for it, economic demand from real people with real money, then the private sector will step in, like it does with every other product and service that people have not been trained to expect for free from the government and the dehumanized "taxpayer".
