Thread: Why is the government so very bad when it comes to commerce and jobs creation?

Many liberals hear the work “profit” and they literally become apoplectic. They believe it this the government’s role to over regulate our economy until they can squeeze every ounce of profit out of it.

What many people do not realize is the profit motive associated with capitalism is good in that it forces a business to streamline its operations and deliver its consumer products to its customers at the least expensive possible price. This is of particular importance to poor Americans and senior Americans who must live each day on their limited retirement incomes.

Wal-Mart and The Apple Stores are two very good examples. Because of innovations such as computerized inventory management, just-in-time product delivery and their ability to purchase large volumes of commercial products from their vendors, Wal-Mart is able to sell its products at the lowest possible cost to its customers.

If the government provided these same services to the public, they would do so with much less efficiency and with a much higher cost to American consumers than does Wal-Mart. The reason for this is the government is not concerned with making a profit or streamlining its operations and operates its “business” as if it were a monopoly.

Consequently, there are no stringent cost savings considerations or strict accountability to its “shareholders”(the taxpayers) when it comes to how a government entity performs its functions. They consequently would purchase more products then they could possibly sell to their consumers, saddle their vendors with costly and unnecessary contractual specifications and paperwork (adds greatly to the cost of the commercial products), hire too many people, pay them too much money and pass these unreasonable costs on to the consumer. The U.S. Post Office, the Walter Reed Army hospital (now closed) and Am-Track are three perfect examples of government entities with these kinds of avoidable and unnecessary inefficiencies.

These inefficiencies and costly requirements do nothing more than drive up the cost the public has to pay for these commercial products. As a result, Wal-Mart is able to sell these same products to the public (the consumers) at half the price as the government even when Wal-Mart’s profit mark-up is factored in!

Right. Government doesn't have to be concerned with making a profit because if they need more money they just spend it. In essence, they have a blank check. So it's sort of false to say that they don't have to worry about profit because they basically build profit into the equation to begin with. I also would not care about making money if I could just go anywhere and take anything I wanted any time I wanted. And with that comes a total lack of concern about the consumer, or citizen. There's no competition, so if you don't like it where are you going to go? You can't create a competing business, either. So you take high overheads, poor customer service, and slow service and you pay steeply for that. Couple that with services that are forced on people, like AmTrack. There's no demand there, but we are told that we "must" subsidize the service. Then, when ridership drops, the solution is to charge customers more to use the service, further disincentivizing usage. The government is an utter failure.

If Obama would say "This Plan will facilitate an enviroment that allows American buisnesses to invest, hire people and reduce the unemployment rate" it would have been more fitting to what the government will do.
But in that case he would sound like John Kerry... half of the audiance would have fallen asleep after "American..." and there would be no cool footage for the Media to praise or hate.

Government can and always has been very crucial in doing that investment enviroment intervention thingy... it works superb in the the real economy.
Just decide what your nation needs, give incentives or make investments in counterproductive things harder / less attractive.

It sure works, it just requires a political culture that result oriented and not attention oriented. You seriously suck at that.

Nah, we saw the results and decided that Europe can keep them.

Our nation was founded on the idea that we don't take orders from a sovereign.

As of the first half of 2011 the German budget deficit is down to 0.3% of GDP.

Originally Posted by James Cessna

Many liberals hear the work “profit” and they literally become apoplectic. They believe it this the government’s role to over regulate our economy until they can squeeze every ounce of profit out of it.

What many people do not realize is the profit motive associated with capitalism is good in that it forces a business to streamline its operations and deliver its consumer products to its customers at the least expensive possible price. This is of particular importance to poor Americans and senior Americans who must live each day on their limited retirement incomes.

Wal-Mart and The Apple Stores are two very good examples. Because of innovations such as computerized inventory management, just-in-time product delivery and their ability to purchase large volumes of commercial products from their vendors, Wal-Mart is able to sell its products at the lowest possible cost to its customers.

If the government provided these same services to the public, they would do so with much less efficiency and with a much higher cost to American consumers than does Wal-Mart. The reason for this is the government is not concerned with making a profit or streamlining its operations and operates its “business” as if it were a monopoly.

Consequently, there are no stringent cost savings considerations or strict accountability to its “shareholders”(the taxpayers) when it comes to how a government entity performs its functions. They consequently would purchase more products then they could possibly sell to their consumers, saddle their vendors with costly and unnecessary contractual specifications and paperwork (adds greatly to the cost of the commercial products), hire too many people, pay them too much money and pass these unreasonable costs on to the consumer. The U.S. Post Office, the Walter Reed Army hospital (now closed) and Am-Track are three perfect examples of government entities with these kinds of avoidable and unnecessary inefficiencies.

These inefficiencies and costly requirements do nothing more than drive up the cost the public has to pay for these commercial products. As a result, Wal-Mart is able to sell these same products to the public (the consumers) at half the price as the government even when Wal-Mart’s profit mark-up is factored in!

It of course IS "NOT" the Governments function to CREATE JOBS but it "IS" the Governments function to "REGULATE" the manner in which business will function to prevent actions "HARMFUL" overall to the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Our "RECESSION" is a result of "LACK" of "LEGISLATION NOT
TOO MUCH LEGISLATION" in a move geared to attain PROFIT and POLITICAL GAIN" contrary to the general welfare of our people.

What was ACCOMPLISHED was done very efficiently by private industry with the aid of the NON ACTION of their CONFEDERATES in Washington. Is that the kind of EFFICIENCY we need ? The beneficiaries of the above action call it "FREE TRADE"

Obviously we "JUST THINK" we elect those in office "TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN WORKER" AND ALL OUR PEOPLE

THE DANGER IS FROM WITHIN NOT WITHOUT !

the problem is that govt feels as thouh it ought to DO something when that act works against commerce. but as they seek only to decide who wins and who loses (Solyndra for example) the rest is moot.

Originally Posted by eohrnberger

Not at all. However, there are some that seem to have forgotten these basic realities and their approach is to keep piling on more government and more regulation, which does little more than further exasperate the fundamental problem, which is: We can't even afford the government that we already have.

Some things, such as a nation's banking system has to be regulated to protect us from the greed for higher returns from riskier investments.

Some regulations are not only needed, but essential. If not, greed will destroy others. We have laws for all types of behavior, and economics is no different from travelers on this nation's highways and roads. We have speed limits for a reason. We have traffic laws or regulations for a reason. The reason is, we cannot trust humans to act right, or to not endanger others in their self centeredness.

Yet when it comes to an economy, the Cons seem to want to let it go as it will, as that is the highest economic good, I reckon. But this approach ignores what humans are, and how self centeredness is generally destructive to society. And how we tend to have many that simply don't care what happens to a nation, or its people.

Originally Posted by James Cessna

Many liberals hear the work “profit” and they literally become apoplectic. They believe it this the government’s role to over regulate our economy until they can squeeze every ounce of profit out of it.

ahoy James Cessna,

actually, liberals be not profit averse.

liberals also do not believe that the role 'o government is to squeeze every ounce 'o profit out of the economy.

*bows*

- MeadHallPirate