Monopoly

[demwing]

Damn! I am tired of people electing their politicians into office on the strength of the "fact" that they have "Business Experience." First of all, many of the bozo's that run on their CEO resumes were business FAILURES (George Bush, anyone?), so I'm not sure why we'd want them to run our cities, states, or our federal government - but that's another thread. Let's talk about CEOs, jobs, and profits.

A CEO has one job to do. There are many tasks involved in that one job, but they all boil down to this - deliver profits to the shareholders.

Rick Scott was elected because people wanted jobs in Florida, and who can blame them for that? But if we voted in Scott to run his state like a business, should we really expect jobs?

People mistakenly believe that a CEO is both interested in and able to create jobs. CEOs manage the process of reigning in costs and maximizing profits. Are jobs profitable for the shareholders? The primary reason employees are required for profitability is to keep up with demand for a company's goods or services. You can't sustain growth by hiring people you don't need. That just leads to future layoffs, and loss of profitability to the shareholders, in the form of excess wages. Therefore, the way to create jobs AND profitability is by creating DEMAND. This is where government can help, and this is what should differentiate the roles of mayors, governors, and presidents from CEOs.

To maintain DEMAND, you sometimes have to redistribute wealth. It's simple...if people don't have the means, they won't make the purchases. Purchases=Demand. Put money in the hands of the unemployed, and they'll SPEND it, immediately. This causes businesses to increase sales and manufacturing to keep up the supply, and THAT is what creates job. Reagan was ass backward. Wealth doesn't trickle down, it trickles UP.

Don't believe me? Then play a game of Monopoly. What happens when all the wealth goes to one player? GAME OVER! The only way to keep that game going is to periodically take all the Monopoly money and split it between the players. Then, and only then, will the game continue. That's what drives our economy, that's what keeps this game going. CEOs and the businesses they run profit from the game of Monopoly, but governments help us keep that game going, to ensure that everyone gets a shot at playing.

So the next time a friend or relative tells you they want to vote for CEO So-and-So because they know how to create jobs, explain to them that this ain't the case. Tell them the only thing these CEOs know how to do with jobs is to downsize them and send them overseas, and that the only thing they know how to create is profits - FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.

Then ask them to take a look at their paycheck, and compare it to that of an average CEO. Ask the if they honestly think that they hold a share in the American dream.

[white_wolf]

1. Very good post.

K&R

[blm]

2. They only know how to line their pockets while victimizing the masses.

.

[Laxman]

3. Business & Government Are Not Equivalent

"I'm gonna run government like a business" is such b.s.. Businesses pursue profits. They shed unprofitable pursuits. All of their actions are guided by self-interest. Not bad, not good, just the way they work. Government sets policies and provides services. Most, if not all, of the services are provided by government for the common good and most, if not all, are provided by government because there is no profit in them. Certain business principals, like efficiency and cost-effectiveness have a place in government. Some don't. The CEO model always sounds attractive on its face but doesn't really work when the realities of governing are actually faced.

[Shagbark Hickory]

4. The problem isn't with businessmen, the problem is that people who are successful don't ordinarily

run for office.
It's unpleasant work and usually a big cut in pay.

People who are successful businessmen, successful lawyers etc, usually stay in their own professions.

[demwing]

8. No, thats not it at all

My point is NOT that we get bad or failed CEOs (that, as stated in the OP, could be another thread). The problem is in the very assumption that running a government is like running a business. It isn't.

At least not a Democracy or a Republic, because businesses resemble neither. Do businesses ask the workers to vote on who their managers are? Do Workers have any voice in management at all? Not normally, and not with any consistency. A business is an Autocracy. The boss makes the policy, and the workers follow the policy, or the workers get fired.

Q. Why should we runs our cities, counties, states, or nation like Autocracies?
A. We shouldn't, and the assumption that we could, if we just had a successful autocrat (CEO) in charge, is flawed.

[Shagbark Hickory]

9. I neither believe that our govt is run like or business or shouldn't be run as a business.

There are many benefits to operating like a business.
For starters, you aim to be competitive.
You aim to be solvent,
you aim to make money and grow.

Not all businesses are autocracies. Small businesses sure maybe but businesses with a board of directors, officers, shareholders etc have more than one person making decisions.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, demwing.

[Cleita]

6. Why you can't run government like a business.

Businesses are kingdoms. The rules are there to benefit the king and his nobles (CEO, Board of Directors and stockholders) not the subjects (customers) or serfs (employees). The end game is profits or how much gold can you pillage from the neighboring kingdoms. The lowly have very few rights in a company. Government is supposedly about managing a democracy for the benefit of all the citizens, which requires doing what you must that the majority want to happen. It has nothing to do with profit.

[xchrom]

7. recommend