Total Posts:64|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Practical Alternative to Taxation

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 1:31:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have brought this up here several times before and it surprises me, not only there it isn't more talk about it, but that there's isn't a cohesive movement around it. People always argue about lowering taxes, raising taxes, which taxes we should have, and they pay absolutely no attention to this alternative. It's not that there's anything absurd about it. Indeed, absurd ideas usually become pretty popular. It's more like people just don't think of it.

So I'm presenting it here again. What I am talking about is a form of government revenue collection through direct profit of enterprise rather than the indirect method of taxation. What this would entail is that the government itself would own and operate businesses that work for a profit. I see this as a highly practical alternative. It compromises between the left that demands more revenue and the right which often sees an inherent injustice in taxation as theft. Keep in mind that it wouldn't mean the government could simply claim any business and start taking all it's profit. That's not much more than a 100% tax on selective people. Rather, the government would compete openly on the "free-market" and buy businesses from those who agree to sell them. The government also retains the ability to print and borrow money as to buy these businesses with.

It may also promote a larger picture where the public and private sectors do a separation. The state interferes less and less with the private sector and increases it's own domain, competing alongside with it.

Thoughts? Incite? Revelations? kfc?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?
Debate.org Moderator
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?
Debate.org Moderator
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:13:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Ha, yeah. But I'm not talking about profit for the people who run the government, but revenue for it's services.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:14:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?

They could do it if they just put their minds to it and work hard! :D
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:15:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:13:35 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Ha, yeah. But I'm not talking about profit for the people who run the government, but revenue for it's services.

Yeah, I know what ya mean.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:15:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.

Please do.. Because I'd really like to believe your plan is plausible. But with the way government is generally run, the lack of accountability would make it generally seem as though a profitable and successful business run through a bureaucracy is nearly impossible.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:17:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:14:56 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?

They could do it if they just put their minds to it and work hard! :D

Yeah perhaps.. I don't think its the lack of hard work or putting their mind to it, (USPS certainly has hard working people who want it to succeed) its simply a systematic problem that makes it nearly impossible it seems.
Debate.org Moderator
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:19:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:17:18 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:14:56 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?

They could do it if they just put their minds to it and work hard! :D

Yeah perhaps.. I don't think its the lack of hard work or putting their mind to it, (USPS certainly has hard working people who want it to succeed) its simply a systematic problem that makes it nearly impossible it seems.

All they have to do is pull up their bootstraps and be honest, hard-working people! The government gets money and we get an honest, hard-working government! It's a win-win!
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:22:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:15:55 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.

Please do.. Because I'd really like to believe your plan is plausible. But with the way government is generally run, the lack of accountability would make it generally seem as though a profitable and successful business run through a bureaucracy is nearly impossible.

It seems to me that that is usually the case due to the lack of profit motive associated with level of success. Committees are given money then just given an abstract goal to run things. Whereas, with this, we are reintroducing it back into the equation. An administrator would be selected for a certain enterprise and would be allowed to keep a certain percentage of the income. Usually, someone wouldn't want to run a business for only a percentage of the reward but in this case it is the government who is the one putting money into the enterprise and thus taking up the risk. It could even be set up so that the best administrators receive the most funding to improve their business.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:24:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:19:52 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:17:18 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:14:56 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?

They could do it if they just put their minds to it and work hard! :D

Yeah perhaps.. I don't think its the lack of hard work or putting their mind to it, (USPS certainly has hard working people who want it to succeed) its simply a systematic problem that makes it nearly impossible it seems.

All they have to do is pull up their bootstraps and be honest, hard-working people! The government gets money and we get an honest, hard-working government! It's a win-win!

I think its pretty clear then that the only thing holding back successful government businesses is a lack of boot straps... So If the government invests heavily in boot straps, there should be nothing stopping us from having a profitable government-run business.

There is your answer Freedo...

First comes the boot straps, then comes the self sustained government.
Debate.org Moderator
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:27:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:24:15 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:19:52 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:17:18 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:14:56 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:12:48 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:47 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:09:35 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

A lot of them were or are business owners?

politicians, I mean.

Has that proven to make a difference in government? Is there an example of a successful government run business? I can think of a couple just off the top of my head... Government housing corporation: Fanny and Freddy.. thats a big NO.. how about government package transportation: USPS: Another big NO...

I'm asking sincerely, is there an example, or any evidence at all, to suggest that government is capable of running a successful business?

They could do it if they just put their minds to it and work hard! :D

Yeah perhaps.. I don't think its the lack of hard work or putting their mind to it, (USPS certainly has hard working people who want it to succeed) its simply a systematic problem that makes it nearly impossible it seems.

All they have to do is pull up their bootstraps and be honest, hard-working people! The government gets money and we get an honest, hard-working government! It's a win-win!

I think its pretty clear then that the only thing holding back successful government businesses is a lack of boot straps... So If the government invests heavily in boot straps, there should be nothing stopping us from having a profitable government-run business.

There is your answer Freedo...

First comes the boot straps, then comes the self sustained government.

Ex-ACT-ly. Boot straps--->Success. It's a very simple formula.

What type of business could the government run that wouldn't interfere with it's (already SUPER impartial, I'm sure) regulation of the various sectors?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:29:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
its not that easy though, especially for the US, because the US has almost a trillion dollar budget and entire industry are only worth billions, the only way it would work is if the US just suddenly became business savvy in multiple industries and could somehow manage all of those corporations successfully to make all the money they need.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:32:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:22:25 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:15:55 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.

Please do.. Because I'd really like to believe your plan is plausible. But with the way government is generally run, the lack of accountability would make it generally seem as though a profitable and successful business run through a bureaucracy is nearly impossible.

It seems to me that that is usually the case due to the lack of profit motive associated with level of success. Committees are given money then just given an abstract goal to run things. Whereas, with this, we are reintroducing it back into the equation. An administrator would be selected for a certain enterprise and would be allowed to keep a certain percentage of the income. Usually, someone wouldn't want to run a business for only a percentage of the reward but in this case it is the government who is the one putting money into the enterprise and thus taking up the risk. It could even be set up so that the best administrators receive the most funding to improve their business.

If this were the case, that someone at the top has real accountability and an incentive to make sure the business is successful, then it would increase the plausibility of success in general.

Putting this plan in action seems unrealistic however, as the bureaucratic process makes it very difficult and especially slow in reacting to the market and run a business how it should be.

That's not to say it's impossible, I'm just wondering if there are any real examples to pull from.
Debate.org Moderator
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:35:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:29:35 AM, imabench wrote:
its not that easy though, especially for the US, because the US has almost a trillion dollar budget and entire industry are only worth billions, the only way it would work is if the US just suddenly became business savvy in multiple industries and could somehow manage all of those corporations successfully to make all the money they need.

The 2011 budget was around 700 billion.

The marijuana industry alone is worth hundreds of billions. There's your solution right there.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:36:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:35:45 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:29:35 AM, imabench wrote:
its not that easy though, especially for the US, because the US has almost a trillion dollar budget and entire industry are only worth billions, the only way it would work is if the US just suddenly became business savvy in multiple industries and could somehow manage all of those corporations successfully to make all the money they need.

The 2011 budget was around 700 billion.

The marijuana industry alone is worth hundreds of billions. There's your solution right there.

Did I mention the bootstraps were made of hemp?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:37:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:32:11 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:22:25 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:15:55 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.

Please do.. Because I'd really like to believe your plan is plausible. But with the way government is generally run, the lack of accountability would make it generally seem as though a profitable and successful business run through a bureaucracy is nearly impossible.

It seems to me that that is usually the case due to the lack of profit motive associated with level of success. Committees are given money then just given an abstract goal to run things. Whereas, with this, we are reintroducing it back into the equation. An administrator would be selected for a certain enterprise and would be allowed to keep a certain percentage of the income. Usually, someone wouldn't want to run a business for only a percentage of the reward but in this case it is the government who is the one putting money into the enterprise and thus taking up the risk. It could even be set up so that the best administrators receive the most funding to improve their business.

If this were the case, that someone at the top has real accountability and an incentive to make sure the business is successful, then it would increase the plausibility of success in general.

Putting this plan in action seems unrealistic however, as the bureaucratic process makes it very difficult and especially slow in reacting to the market and run a business how it should be.

That's not to say it's impossible, I'm just wondering if there are any real examples to pull from.

The best example I can give is China. The government picks and chooses people to run different businesses and they do it for them without the bureaucracy.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:38:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:36:48 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:35:45 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:29:35 AM, imabench wrote:
its not that easy though, especially for the US, because the US has almost a trillion dollar budget and entire industry are only worth billions, the only way it would work is if the US just suddenly became business savvy in multiple industries and could somehow manage all of those corporations successfully to make all the money they need.

The 2011 budget was around 700 billion.

The marijuana industry alone is worth hundreds of billions. There's your solution right there.

Did I mention the bootstraps were made of hemp?

lol, there ya go.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:45:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:37:34 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:32:11 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:22:25 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:15:55 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:10:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:02:40 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
Is there any evidence to suggest that the government is capable of running a profitable business?

You know, I really don't know. It seems like every time we nationalize something it has always been for the purpose of making it free. I'll do some research.

Please do.. Because I'd really like to believe your plan is plausible. But with the way government is generally run, the lack of accountability would make it generally seem as though a profitable and successful business run through a bureaucracy is nearly impossible.

It seems to me that that is usually the case due to the lack of profit motive associated with level of success. Committees are given money then just given an abstract goal to run things. Whereas, with this, we are reintroducing it back into the equation. An administrator would be selected for a certain enterprise and would be allowed to keep a certain percentage of the income. Usually, someone wouldn't want to run a business for only a percentage of the reward but in this case it is the government who is the one putting money into the enterprise and thus taking up the risk. It could even be set up so that the best administrators receive the most funding to improve their business.

If this were the case, that someone at the top has real accountability and an incentive to make sure the business is successful, then it would increase the plausibility of success in general.

Putting this plan in action seems unrealistic however, as the bureaucratic process makes it very difficult and especially slow in reacting to the market and run a business how it should be.

That's not to say it's impossible, I'm just wondering if there are any real examples to pull from.

The best example I can give is China. The government picks and chooses people to run different businesses and they do it for them without the bureaucracy.

So if our government becomes totalitarian, I guess its plausible... Otherwise the same issues apply. But there is a good point made here in that direct accountability is necessary. It reminds me that when those people appointed to head those companies in China mess up, they often tend to commit suicide.
Debate.org Moderator
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:48:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:45:22 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
So if our government becomes totalitarian, I guess its plausible... Otherwise the same issues apply. But there is a good point made here in that direct accountability is necessary. It reminds me that when those people appointed to head those companies in China mess up, they often tend to commit suicide.

I don't see what totalitarianism has to do with the success. It doesn't have to be all business and it can be done voluntarily.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 2:55:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 2:48:36 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/4/2012 2:45:22 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
So if our government becomes totalitarian, I guess its plausible... Otherwise the same issues apply. But there is a good point made here in that direct accountability is necessary. It reminds me that when those people appointed to head those companies in China mess up, they often tend to commit suicide.

I don't see what totalitarianism has to do with the success. It doesn't have to be all business and it can be done voluntarily.

China can avoid the bureaucratic issues because of the nature of its government. Since this is just a hypothetical, we can say that it might work in the US. But for practical and realistic purposes, those administrators would still be appointed by elected officials lacking such accountability. These elected officials incentive is to be reelected, not see such a business be successful.

Example:

Barney Frank is the equivalent to one of these administrators. He oversaw the blunder that is the US government running a business. Fanny and Freddy.
(This is more complex, but I'm simplifying for the sake of this example)

The question is, how is such a lack of accountability avoidable?

Because of the nature of politics this "failure" is simply politicized and spun in a way in which no one is held accountable, and he isn't removed from that position.

Therefore a solution to this is needed. In China the nature of the model allows this. In the US, it seems nearly impossible.
Debate.org Moderator
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 3:01:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Is it a strawman to point out that the government bureaucracy is capable of collecting taxes?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 3:14:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 3:01:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Is it a strawman to point out that the government bureaucracy is capable of collecting taxes?

I guess I don't understand the point. There is no business management involved. It's simply a matter of collecting funds.

What product or service is being sold? It's not a business, it's a collection service. Thus its not really comparable. With this example, the government doesn't have to make sure it proceeds within operating cost or that it makes a profit, and therefore has none of the most important aspects that characterize a business in general.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 3:18:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'll add to that point that if this (collecting taxes) were a private endeavor, then it would have to be done more efficiently. The tax code would have to be reduced so the amount of labor necessary for it to function could be, in such that labor and upkeep could be minimized. This is part of what seems to characterize government enterprise in general.

...Overwhelming complexity for the sake of it. Which often seems to be a direct result of the bureaucratic process.
Debate.org Moderator
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 3:20:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/4/2012 3:14:33 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 5/4/2012 3:01:13 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Is it a strawman to point out that the government bureaucracy is capable of collecting taxes?

I guess I don't understand the point. There is no business management involved. It's simply a matter of collecting funds.

What product or service is being sold? It's not a business, it's a collection service. Thus its not really comparable. With this example, the government doesn't have to make sure it proceeds within operating cost or that it makes a profit, and therefore has none of the most important aspects that characterize a business in general.

It's the same in that the only thing the bureaucracy is doing is collecting the funds. The rest of the process is only made up of employees that do as they would normally do.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2012 3:22:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
the only way the government could make their businesses profitable is that they would have to use legal means to exclude competition. In essence, this would be much worse for economic development and a form of state socialism. It's not a "left" vs. "right" compromise. Instead it is a far left compromise.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...