Should governments be run like a business?
Side Score: 6
Side Score: 14
I think Governments should be run like a business because with the government currently not following too many strict policies, unlike companies in the business world, they tend to get away with many things including personal corruption and spending way more than its set income. There is no way we are going to get out of our current 19.5 million dollar dept when we keep pretending that our government has an unlimited amount of cash to spend. Also, an associate in the government should be kept based on performance, like in a business. A lot of corrupt government officials aren't pulling their own weight and are solely taking advantage of their high end position. The goal of any business is to make more than what you spend, and that is the exact concept our government needs to establish.
A nation's budget should be maintained within the limits of it's projected expenditure.
Of course the projections may very well include provision for borrowing to meet any shortfall in financing public services or the construction of infrastructure schemes.
However, any such proposed borrowing should be accompanied with an accurate forecast of the duration of the loan(s) and the frequency of the repayments with all such repayment plans being strictly adhered to.
All too often governments, especially left wing socialists, start on the road to bankrupting their country by over borrowing with no idea how the loans are going to be repaid, SUCH AS GREECE AND ARGENTINA, and have to arrange to borrow additional funds to service the original debt(s).
This can go undetected until the whole house of cards falls down around them.
Then the irresponsible left wingers are voted out of power and the realistic conservatives are left, as usual, with the unpopular task of telling their people ''how it is'' and explain the necessity to impose strict austerity measures to deal with the financial crisis.
If commercial enterprises were managed in the same way the loonie lefties manage some countries they would go bankrupt.
When the spaghetti INEVITABLY hits the fan, governments can last longer than those who have to live within their budgeted expenditure as milking the taxpayer, is not an option open to private companies.
Those people such as Obama, who were entrusted with the proper management of a nation, but through gross irresponsibility incurred a massive multi trillion dollar deficit, should be prosecuted for criminal negligence.
Yes, but do we understand the product that is created by the business.
Governments are a business, there are Monopolies, Corporations, and Companies. What history has shown us is that it is only the monopoly which does not structure its life around competition, cost, and colleague’s. As the monopoly’s goal is to simply “make” everyone a customer.
The Corporation expects only a person that make decisions to be an Executive, Broad member, then Shareholder. Corporations also have an expectation that the shareholders have paid for this position, and may not fully understand the danger their votes can hold on the money they have place into the Corporation.
Companies expect a place to provide service for the customer using employees to supply a service or good. They expect to have single person decisions unless they have partners. They often have goals of incorporating to achieve shareholders, or just gain size. Or, the company may simple choose to be the best that they can be, were they are.
The basic dilemma this question possess by forcing a choice of yes or no is that a government is describing the governing of people, meaning the reduction of the redundant voices. So that the most efficient method of separation can be created, to help insure the broadest spectrum of idea and opinions can be heard. Without effecting the overall performance of the object being governed.
The problem that can arise is that Governing tend to drive the monopoly unless the mission statement of the business is understood. In the United States a mission statement can be drawn by the Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution. A Basic separation is a Non-biased, fundamental way to interpret Justice for all. For it does not presume Justice, it simply views it as a distance held or placed by steps toward separation.
This is only identifying and highlighting the basic understanding between the separations of politics and governing.
From Forbes Magazine:
If you're asking the government to run like a business you're also asking it to turn a profit but not everything is profitable.Reality TV, fashion, sports, and gambling are all of questionable social value, but each is quite profitable and exists in the private sector. Meanwhile, few would argue that the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, police department, fire department, libraries, parks, and public schools are of no social value, and yet they could not exist if they were required to be profitable. Imagine maintaining a standing military by selling subscriptions door-to-door: “Hello, my name is Captain Johnson, and I represent the US Army. Are you afraid of foreigners? Would you like guaranteed protection against invasion, pillaging, enslavement, and more? Please see our brochure for our three levels of service.” There would, of course, be a few subscribers, but nothing approaching the level necessary to truly protect the United States from attack.
From The Federalist:
Running government wholly like a business fuels progressive ends because it rejects the necessary work of compromise, give-and-take, and logrolling in favor of action simply. It rejects politics itself in favor of micromanaging virtually every aspect of our lives without our consent.
From Paste Magazine:
The mission of government is more complex than the mission of a business. In fact, the government’s mission is itself a constant source of contention, with different political parties and factions within the government having different ideas and agendas about what government is for, what it should do, and what are the limits of government power. Running a business can be incredibly complex and stressful, too, of course – but the complexities of a business are more narrowly focused than the complexities of government. Even the biggest, most complex businesses are simpler than the U.S. government. Business is like playing checkers; politics is like playing 3D Chinese checkers—but with the Supreme Court stepping in and changing the rules halfway through the game.
You can't ask the government to make a profit off of something when they don't have anything to make a profit out of. Running the government like a business, you lose focus of anything else the government should be working on. Running a government is way different than running a business, it is way more complex and focus on more things than just one.
No, because governments and businesses are 2 different things. The Government is very complex compared to even the biggest businesses and the Government has to constantly change laws around. The Government would also invest only in special things rather than having a broad coverage of all people. If the Government was ran like a business than most people would not be happy with it and the government wont care as much.
Government is not a corporation.
The Government does not need to make a profit.
Government provides services to citizens that are of social benefit that are not necessarily profitable like the military.
Government is set up to be long term unlike businesses that are short term.
Businesses work like competition and government does not there is only one choice.
Governments are entities created to support the needs of the population, businesses are created to make a profit.
Government does not need to make a profit
Government is created to help the population not make a quick buck.
Governments are set up to think more long term instead of businesses who think more short term.
Government should be focused more on operating better rather than continuing to grow the financial deficit.
Government should NOT be run like a business because unlike a business, where it is more or less easier to control what goes on, a government has to take into account every single person living under that government. There is rich and poor, many different races, many different incomes, and so much more. In a business, you can more or less control who you hire, how much to pay, when things happen, and so on. The people who work for that company will agree and comply with the rules because they want or need the job. Under a government, there are so many different ideas, that although you can't please everyone, you need to consider the different beliefs and values of many. Another reason a government shouldn't be run like a business is that most likely a lot of social services would be cut from the budget, because not everything that has social value makes a profit. There are many people who need help in this world and in our own country. If you look at everything solely from a numbers standpoint, and not the human side of things, even more people would be unhappy with our government. Governments also need to look at the human side of things, and business don't usually do that. Lastly, our entire government is built on the ideas that the government is for the people. If the government was run like a business, the government would be all about the profit, not the people.
The notion of running the government like a business sounds like a good idea, but would actually be detrimental. It would create tyranny. James Madison said in Federalist 47 that "the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Businessmen tend to look for the largest profit margin. If we were to make our government like that, it wouldn't work. Reality TV, pornography, fashion, sports, and gambling are all of questionable social value, but each is quite profitable and exists in the private sector. Meanwhile, few would argue that the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, police department, fire department, libraries, parks, and public schools are of no social value, and yet they could not exist if they were required to be profitable. In the eyes of profit, the business side of government might look past inalienable human rights for the "benefit" of the nation. Recently, Dakota Access Oil Pipeline tried to construct a line through the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. It has since been ruled unconstitutional due to protesting and out-speaking against it, however in a business run government, the government would overlook that in order to maintain profit.
Government should not be run like a business because government stands for people with different races, opportunity, people with different types of culture, incomes,.. ,First, government should support and provide the needs of people. There are still many people out there that needs a place to go, government should spend money for health care, public schools, foster homes, place for old people, etc rather than make money from people. Business and government are the two different goals, business is basically where you make profits but government is not, it's way more complicated. In government, you have a to make a good decision, but in business you have a lot of decisions to choose. Government obviously would use people's taxes to do business and government can't do that
1) Business is about maximizing profit for the owner or shareholders. The owner and shareholders of government (the people) are interested in far more topics than just national profit.
2) Business is usually about growth. But most government critics are instead advocating the smallest government possible.
3) Business is conducted with anyone with money willing to pay. Government has to be selective in partners and clients.
4) Business can pick up and move itself completely. Government is inevitably tied to a specific location and can't do that. It can add locations, but it can't completely relocated.
5) Business members and clients have no rights other than to conduct business or to not. Governments, at least in the West, are obligated to honor certain rights of both members and clients.
6) Businesses as lobbyists already hold far to much sway over government. Declaring government should be run like a business simply throws the door open wide for the government to be a puppet of all those other business.
7) Businesses can change their governance at any time for any reason. Democratic governments have to wait for elections.
8) Business can depreciate investments. Government doesn't get a tax write off for itself to itself.
9) Businesses can declare bankruptcy if necessary. Governments can only fail.
10) Businesses can be in hostile business but they don't have to protect themselves from all out war from foreign nations. Governments do.
No for the following reasons:
1) The government will make decisions for its gains and neglect the country
2) There will be more corruption and power struggles
3) The people will be oppressed and taxes will be seen as profit for the government like the British East India Company.
4) Google about the British East India Company and how it had a negative impact on a country and weigh the pros and cons about a business controlling a nation.
1. This would cause the government to be all about the profit and not about the people.
2. Every worker for the government would have to answer to the rest of the US. It would be a lot to put on all of those workers.
3. If the government was run like a business they would set a standard and if you do not like the standard you will be left behind and fend for yourself.