Is this a fallacy and if so what is it called?

Genius is in simplicity, government is complex, therefor we should do away with government.

Person A: We need to take action on climate change and vote for the Green New Deal.
Person B: That is a stupid idea because government is complex, and genius is in simplicity as in the story of Daedalus. Government is controlled by banks as they create the currency from nothing. Therefor nothing Government can do will help solve anything. Small or limited government and monetary reform with a gold standard is needed instead.

Just assumptions and assertions. If we worked this into argument form:

P1. Genius is in simplicity
P2. Government is complex
C. Therefore, we should do away with government.

This is a non-sequitur as the conclusion does not follow. Is simplicity better? Should we do away with all things complex?

It's a hell of a leap from simplicity in genius (as according to Daedelus) to government solutions for climate change. As currently phrased it's not just a Non-sequitur, but also a very odd Appeal to False Authority. (See Dr. Bo's Description: When a person making a claim is presented as an expert who should be trusted when his or her expertise is not in the area being discussed.)

Even the referral to Daedelus as a paragon of simple genius is rather dubious as he was famed throughout the Greek Historic age as a master craftsman, architect, and builder. All very complex enterprises. He may be correctly lauded for his aesthetic brilliance, but I'm not sure the same expertise would apply to climate change nor the clumsy complexity of bureaucratic institutions you include in your general usage of government.

The assertion here is

When dealing with climate change simple solutions are is better than complex ones.
Government solutions such as the green deal are by nature complex,
therefore we should do away with government.

Yikes, this is an either or fallacy, (simplicity v complexity), a hasty generalization, or perhaps a good case for a fallacy of dramatic instance.

"The fallacy of dramatic instance refers to the tendency to overgeneralize, to use one, two, or three cases to support an entire argument. ... The fallacy of dramatic instance mistakes a few cases for a general situation". (See Critical Thinking: Recognizing Fallacies Collin College Faculty Website)

P1.Genius is in simplicity,
P2.government is complex,
________________________
C: therefor we should do away with government.

Premise 1 has nothing to do with Premise 2. Government and genius have no relationship and the complexity of government doesn't demonstrate that we should do away with it. The measure of how effective government is can't be determined by it's complexity. Our society is complex. and we can argue that government is as complex as a complex society requires. Doing away with govt. won't make us genius's.

The conclusion of a standard form categorical syllogism is negative, but both of the premises are positive. Any valid forms of categorical syllogisms that assert a negative conclusion must have at least one negative premise.

Negative Conclusion from Affirmative Premises
(also known as: illicit affirmative)

From the authors book;
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/133/Negative-Conclusion-from-Affirmative-Premises