Non-government people who tip the IRS off to tax fraud do get a slice of the recovered funds. There was a guy a few years ago who tipped off the IRS to tax cheats using Swiss bank accounts and he received over $100 million in compensation.
Paying government employees on commission is a totally foolish idea.
Running the government like a business is a foolish idea. But if that’s what’s going to happen, you need to provide an incentive to the top money makers.
I know tons of businesses that don’t accomplish this. Good customer service is not a function of the profit motive.
For example, I’d say the D.C. DMV is about five times more customer service oriented than Comcast.
First of all, the size of the government is an order of magnitude larger than even the largest corporations. $4 trillion Federal budget vs $400 billion in revenue for WalMart.
The Federal government can’t simply ignore it’s 350 million customers.
Many services can’t and shouldn’t be profit-driven.
Congress is not the POTUS’s “underlings”. They are state representatives elected by the constituents in their states.
Businesses don’t have the ability to print currency.
Snipped:
What exactly did they cut and how much was saved? What is “tremendous costs”?
That bar is so low Trump’s ethics couldn’t squeeze under it.
Objection! Assumption being made that Trump has ethics.
Government should not be run like a business because if someone f’s-up, there is no government there to bail you out (such as for the financial and auto industries).
Government is there to provide services that everyone benefits from: infrastructure, application of laws, regulation of industry to insure safety, etc. These things are necessary for the country to function, but are not going to turn a profit, like a business would expect.
Certainly no conflicts of interest there.:rolleyes:
Running a government like any business that I know about? Label everything as deceptively as you think you can get away with.
Not only that, but Americans have this naive idea that all private business is somehow perfectly run.
I’ve seen private businesses–businesses that were “successful” for the owners–that had waste, incompetence, nepotism, excessive paperwork (i.e., “bureaucracy”), dishonest and self-serving employees, and everything else that Americans think are problems solely belonging to government.
Maybe that’s his plan - dump Mississippi & Alabama.
I don’t see anything wrong with running government like a business. We the citizens of this country are the stockholders and the government is obligated to operate it for our benefit in the method that we decide. If we did run the government like a business then each of us would have to be treated as owning an equal share instead of favoring individuals and groups as if they owner more of it than the rest of us. What we need is an electorate that has the sense to demand that our government is run like a business that we own.
If you own a few shares of Comcast, you may very well see an appreciating stock price or even collect a dividend, but that does not in any way imply that you’re going to get your TV service fixed this week, or your bill straightened out this decade.
The interests of the stockholders and the customers are not necessarily congruent, nor are the interests of the majority stockholders necessarily the same as those who hold 100 shares.
But the government officers who f’ up will find someone to bail them out. Like ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and so forth. It’s worked so far.
The problem with this debate is that, any bad example of privatisation tends to be dismissed as a local failure of implementation of privatisation, not failure of concept of ‘running government as a business’.
Which is interesting, because at the other end of the scale, communism is regarded as impossible to implement, exactly because it only works in theory, not in practice.
The last part used to be how it worked. Does anybody here know when did we move to the current model of having the collections done by an agency with salaried workers? I don’t…
The government doesn’t have customers in that sense, only stockholders, and each with an equal share. Your view demonstrates the problem, you are not a customer of the government, you are an owner.
Does this mean that underperforming or unprofitable divisions get sold off? If so, states that receive significantly more federal monies than they provide might find themselves up for sale. Goodbye Mississippi!
Then who are the government’s customers? There aren’t any?
300 million shareholders and no customers. Not exactly what I’d call a viable business.