9
9
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
Trump isn't running it like a business or he would have done a lot more, very quickly. This notion that he is running it "like a business" is another attack from the left to try to make what he is doing look sinister.
The writer talks about corporations "profit". While it is true governments do not have profit, they can run a surplus which means they spend less than they take in. What a novel concept.
The left is watching their ox (big government) getting gored, a little bit, and they are fighting every step of the way. You can see who the real enemies of freedom are, it is those living off government largesse. There are so many with a vested interest from defense contractors to universities to research facilities to foreign governments to government employees to the lauded welfare queens etc. etc. etc.
There is nothing wrong with looking at government as an entity that should be efficient and effective and should live within it's means. Is the writer seriously arguing that the political class that has us at 20 trillion in debt has earned the right to keep steering the ship? Should we just "stay the course"? To where, to what end?
How do you measure success in government. It is simple for me, Is it smaller than it was last year. That will work for right now until we can start living within our means. The writers seems to defend the status quo of politics as usual but doesn't want to consider where that will get us.
The writer talks about corporations "profit". While it is true governments do not have profit, they can run a surplus which means they spend less than they take in. What a novel concept.
The left is watching their ox (big government) getting gored, a little bit, and they are fighting every step of the way. You can see who the real enemies of freedom are, it is those living off government largesse. There are so many with a vested interest from defense contractors to universities to research facilities to foreign governments to government employees to the lauded welfare queens etc. etc. etc.
There is nothing wrong with looking at government as an entity that should be efficient and effective and should live within it's means. Is the writer seriously arguing that the political class that has us at 20 trillion in debt has earned the right to keep steering the ship? Should we just "stay the course"? To where, to what end?
How do you measure success in government. It is simple for me, Is it smaller than it was last year. That will work for right now until we can start living within our means. The writers seems to defend the status quo of politics as usual but doesn't want to consider where that will get us.
(10)
(0)
(2)
(0)
SSgt Ray Stone
He's attempting to run it like a business by slashing regulations which will benefits big business. The regulations were put into place to protect people against abusive employers, predatory lending, unsafe food and drugs and environmental pollution. But hey no surprise there the Rethugs could care less about Americans
(2)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
SSgt Ray Stone - That is what you all on the left scream and shout about. Most of these regulations do little except to employ regulators, drive up costs for everyone including consumers, they stunt growth, just look at the last 8 years of GDP, please.
This is the standard DNC line of the GOP wants dirty water and polluted air etc. It is a talking point not rooted in any facts.
What you really don't like is that your hero Obama ruled with his mighty pen with loads of EO's and executive direction which can easily be undone or redone by Trump. Obama didn't work on legislation for any of this because it would have never passed through the Congress and it was a lot of work. It was easier to sign a piece of paper and get back to the links.
This is the standard DNC line of the GOP wants dirty water and polluted air etc. It is a talking point not rooted in any facts.
What you really don't like is that your hero Obama ruled with his mighty pen with loads of EO's and executive direction which can easily be undone or redone by Trump. Obama didn't work on legislation for any of this because it would have never passed through the Congress and it was a lot of work. It was easier to sign a piece of paper and get back to the links.
(0)
(0)
To an extent they are correct but bringing a business acumen to the current broken politicized system is a good change in direction.
(8)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
Bringing business "ethics" to the system is not a good change in direction, especial when the direction is decisively towards the "shady".
(0)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
PO1 John C. - Putting those people directly in charge makes that situation even worse.
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
PO1 Rodney Bracey
It's a change in direction that won't work. Boil it down to basics, the sole purpose of any business is to make money for the owners/investors. Government cannot operate like that.
(0)
(0)
Bunk? No. Like all good propaganda, it is built on a kernel of truth. However, the author trips all over his ideology before completing the first paragraph. The title is true if you interpret it to mean that you cannot govern people like you would run a business. Here in California we saw an excellent example when Arnold was the "governator". He tried and failed. He tried to manage the citizens. They needed to be led. (They still do) However, government can be run like a business, and yes, there is too much of it. Way too much of it. Just as major corporations become profitable by trimming unprofitable operations, government can become fiscally responsible by trimming the fat. Sadly, our government has become so bloated that it has to print money to sustain itself. That practice debases the currency in all our pockets and thus represents a hidden tax. No, this article isn't total bunk but you find yourself wading through the bunk within the first 20 words.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next