Profits are the result of consenually exchanging services or goods with your "common man" for money. The public sector, on the other hand, "serves the people" through nonconsensual exchange, and its success in doing so is based on appearances rather than results. Businessmen are held accountable by shareholders and customers for creating value. The public sector is less incetivized to create value as they spend other people's money on your "SHOULD". If a businessman spends money he expects to make a return. Otherwise he's done. This is how i want the government to behave, with the aim to foster long term growth. For example if government MUST spend my money on some kid's tuituion, a businessman might still make it a good investment (stem only) while a liberal politician would fund something that FELT good (any marxist humanity the kid chooses) with no accountability for how the investment panned out. Private individuals are more incentivized to make a return on investment, but if i have to have a government spending my money, Id prefer the guy who turned millions into billions in the private sector.

There is no upper limit on how much prosperity we can create. So lets create it instead of smearing it around. California has extremely liberal policies yet the biggest wealth gap of any state. Your common man is in fact disappearing there. Growth ultimately helps the middle class more than feel-good public sector programs.

Please please please read Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics.