![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
redneckgaijinThis article is one of a long string which offers "X reasons why," in this case nine reasons why "business people" are terrible at running a government.
I considered just passing on the URL (which would have meant a Facebook post- that's practically the only useful thing I've found for that service). Then I decided, "No. I can make this shorter and sweeter and easier to grasp."
So, whittling it down:
(1) Government's mission is to provide its services (at a minimum defense, law enforcement, and a common market) to all regardless of their standing or ability to pay. A business's mission is to provide profit to its owners and investors, with zero regard for the needs and concerns of anyone else. When government is run like a business, a preferred class gets all the benefits while the majority gets shafted.
(2) A member of government's duty is to serve all the people. A businessman's duty is to maximize return on investment of the people who put him in his position- no matter what. An officeholder who operates like a businessman works solely for the benefit of those who paid for his election costs- and nobody else.
(3) Government, driven by voter demand, charges the absolute minimum possible for what it does. Business, driven by shareholder and investor demand, charges the maximum that the market will bear. Thus, despite libertarian claims to the contrary, privatizing vital government services usually makes them more expensive, not less.
(4) Sometimes government has the choice to do a thing which is quite expensive, but does much good for all the people. The cost of such programs is usually felt by the wealthiest, who pay the bulk of taxes. When government is run like a business, the choice will always be to cut expenses, thereby preserving the wealth of the richest taxpayers at the expense of the general good of the nation. The only exception is if the wealthy find a way to gain more profit from the program than they spend in taxes.
(5) If a business has trouble, it can go bankrupt and pretend the mistakes never happened. If a government has trouble, it MUST find a solution, because when a government goes bankrupt it destroys the lives and wealth of the whole nation- not just a few creditors. Thus most businesspeople have a mindset of walking away from their messes rather than cleaning them up- to the detriment of the nation.
To sum up: government, when run like a business, seeks to make the rich richer at the expense of the less-rich- just as almost all businesses do in the marketplace. It seeks to provide the worst quality services at the highest cost- just as all businesses do in the marketplace. It cuts funding for all programs which do not bring profit to those who control it. And it almost always leaves the nation worse off than when it began.
This is why government should NEVER be run like a business, and why businesspeople should NEVER be the first choice for public office.
There. Much shorter than the original article, I think.
I considered just passing on the URL (which would have meant a Facebook post- that's practically the only useful thing I've found for that service). Then I decided, "No. I can make this shorter and sweeter and easier to grasp."
So, whittling it down:
(1) Government's mission is to provide its services (at a minimum defense, law enforcement, and a common market) to all regardless of their standing or ability to pay. A business's mission is to provide profit to its owners and investors, with zero regard for the needs and concerns of anyone else. When government is run like a business, a preferred class gets all the benefits while the majority gets shafted.
(2) A member of government's duty is to serve all the people. A businessman's duty is to maximize return on investment of the people who put him in his position- no matter what. An officeholder who operates like a businessman works solely for the benefit of those who paid for his election costs- and nobody else.
(3) Government, driven by voter demand, charges the absolute minimum possible for what it does. Business, driven by shareholder and investor demand, charges the maximum that the market will bear. Thus, despite libertarian claims to the contrary, privatizing vital government services usually makes them more expensive, not less.
(4) Sometimes government has the choice to do a thing which is quite expensive, but does much good for all the people. The cost of such programs is usually felt by the wealthiest, who pay the bulk of taxes. When government is run like a business, the choice will always be to cut expenses, thereby preserving the wealth of the richest taxpayers at the expense of the general good of the nation. The only exception is if the wealthy find a way to gain more profit from the program than they spend in taxes.
(5) If a business has trouble, it can go bankrupt and pretend the mistakes never happened. If a government has trouble, it MUST find a solution, because when a government goes bankrupt it destroys the lives and wealth of the whole nation- not just a few creditors. Thus most businesspeople have a mindset of walking away from their messes rather than cleaning them up- to the detriment of the nation.
To sum up: government, when run like a business, seeks to make the rich richer at the expense of the less-rich- just as almost all businesses do in the marketplace. It seeks to provide the worst quality services at the highest cost- just as all businesses do in the marketplace. It cuts funding for all programs which do not bring profit to those who control it. And it almost always leaves the nation worse off than when it began.
This is why government should NEVER be run like a business, and why businesspeople should NEVER be the first choice for public office.
There. Much shorter than the original article, I think.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-02-14 08:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 03:32 am (UTC)I get what you're saying here, but I quibble with the wording. I would have phrased it as "it seeks to maximize the gap between level of product or service and price charged".