I think the trouble you're having in understanding here is that the government workers paycheck came from violently taking it from someone else, not from market value of generating something that can be spent.
Imagine you farm and create 200 apples, you go to the crossroads and offer them for sale, and earn $200. Someone comes along, and having themselves spent the day building a table, offers it to you for $200 and you take it. Youve both spent your earnings and even better, you now both feel better off than before. You use the table to better work on your implements for apples, generating more value and spending.
Now suppose, instead, you go to the crossroads, you sell your apples, make $200. Someone comes along, takes that $200, maybe with a badge that says 'taxman', and says "not to worry, we will give it to an employee that will spend it!."
Now maybe that employee will spend your $200 building a table for you or someone else, but he's under no economic pressure to do -- he already has your money. It's just as likely he uses it to create 30 rifle cartridges that get shot into a mountain in Afghanistan. That doesn't increase spending, it just takes what you were going to spend and spends it on something else. If you fire that person, and they're forced to now build tables, spending increases even if they are now paid less.
Imagine you farm and create 200 apples, you go to the crossroads and offer them for sale, and earn $200. Someone comes along, and having themselves spent the day building a table, offers it to you for $200 and you take it. Youve both spent your earnings and even better, you now both feel better off than before. You use the table to better work on your implements for apples, generating more value and spending.
Now suppose, instead, you go to the crossroads, you sell your apples, make $200. Someone comes along, takes that $200, maybe with a badge that says 'taxman', and says "not to worry, we will give it to an employee that will spend it!."
Now maybe that employee will spend your $200 building a table for you or someone else, but he's under no economic pressure to do -- he already has your money. It's just as likely he uses it to create 30 rifle cartridges that get shot into a mountain in Afghanistan. That doesn't increase spending, it just takes what you were going to spend and spends it on something else. If you fire that person, and they're forced to now build tables, spending increases even if they are now paid less.