Statism cloaks itself in the garb of science.  It does this through the relentless collection of statistics.  These aren’t just neutral figures—they’re numbers the state compels businesses to produce.  Instead of focusing on creating value for customers, businesses are burdened with the task of gathering data to satisfy state mandates.  This redirection of resources is wasteful, a coercive cycle that fuels further coercion.  For the planner, statistics are invaluable.  They serve as the planner’s eyes, providing the illusion of scientific precision and control.

The burden on businesses is immense.  Taxes fund the creation and enforcement of laws requiring data collection.  Taxes pay for bureaucrats to sift through the mountains of gathered statistics.  Then, those same statistics are used to justify new interventions, requiring even more taxes.  Businesses, entangled in this web, must navigate ever-thickening red tape, losing their agility and focus on serving customers.  In trying to meet state demands, they become part of a system that stifles innovation and reduces their ability to deliver value.

For the average person, statistics play little role in daily decision-making.  When navigating the market, we rely on experience, personal connections, and online reviews—tools grounded in real-world interaction.  The planner operates outside the market.  Lacking firsthand knowledge of what he seeks to control, the planner leans heavily on statistics as a stand-in for reality.  These numbers are often arbitrary, disconnected from the dynamic, ever-changing nature of human action.

To justify his interventions, the planner must make a show of science.  Statistics give him this façade.  They allow him to argue where resources should flow and what policies should be enacted.  This reliance on numbers imposes tremendous costs, eroding our standard of living.  Worse, it creates the illusion that the planner’s efforts are for the public good.  It’s not about genuinely improving lives—it’s about maintaining an image of competence and securing the planner’s position.

Without statistics, the planner is blind.  Deprived of this market substitute, the machinery of planning would grind to a halt.  The illusion of control would shatter.  This vulnerability is why Murray Rothbard described statistics as the “State’s Achilles’ heel.” Without the numbers, the house of cards collapses.  With it, the false promises of planning fall away, revealing the inefficiency and harm statism inflicts on society.

Reference

Murray Rothbard; Economic Controversies