|
Deficit
Oct 31, 2009 3:15:52 GMT -6
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 31, 2009 3:15:52 GMT -6
Is it possible for a government to be self-sufficient? To create/own businesses that bring in a steady stream of substantial income? 1 If so. What kinds of businesses should a government create/own? And who should be involved with it? Who should be the shareholders? 2 What about government auctions, where donations are sold? A needlepoint made by a senator's wife, mother, or other? A quilt? A painting? 3 Should not a government be self-sufficient? Able to support itself without relying solely on its people? Are there such governments? 4
Blame these questions on Oprah. From her show I learned that in the Netherlands, the people pay as much as 60% income tax. 5 And all I could think was: Why can't a government support itself? What prevents a government from succeeding on its own merits? 6 Okay, here is the story that got me thinking: Women Around the World. 7
If the US Government was self-sufficient, would it squander, misuse and waste its income so that it still needed to tax its people? 8 Should a government expect its people to be more frugal than it is? Should not a government set the example? Set boundaries? 9 If a government punishes its people for overspending, should not the government be punished for doing the same thing? 10
|
|
|
Deficit
Oct 31, 2009 13:39:01 GMT -6
Post by stepper on Oct 31, 2009 13:39:01 GMT -6
No. I'll put this delicately as possible. The owner of the "Chicken Ranch", a well known house of ill repute, refused to pay the required Federal Taxes and so, our illustrious government took over management. Finding itself in the enviable position of "owning" a house of ill repute, which also sells liquor, our government officials were unprepared for the realities of the enterprise and not so long after it took over, they closed the business down because it was loosing too much money. So, our government was incapable of selling the two most profitable products in the country and making a profit from it. Again, my answer is "No"; government's job is to facilitate the business environment and to provide for the common security of the country. Aside from that, we don't need them to screw anything else up with unnecessary and ill advised assistance and guidance.
|
|
|
Deficit
Oct 31, 2009 17:28:27 GMT -6
Post by vox on Oct 31, 2009 17:28:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
Deficit
Oct 31, 2009 18:25:03 GMT -6
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 31, 2009 18:25:03 GMT -6
Okay, ya lost me. I wasn't talking about the government advising, assisting, guiding or taking control of other people's businesses. I was talking about the government creating and owning its own personal businesses/franchises, in order to be self-sufficient and not reliant on its citizens or other nations for financial support.
Granted, if you have too many head honchos giving the orders and contradicting each other, you have a problem. But if there was a system set up, and no one was allowed to second guess or override orders, then surely it would work.
I'm all for trying, if it would help.
I'd think that having government auctions that sold products created by government officials could draw in some money. Surely the people in the government hub have some talents they can use to support the government, and help get it out of hock. Paintings or other artwork, jewelry, needlepoint, quilts, etc. Items with government official quotes, images, etc. A CD or DVD with the government officials singing Christmas songs, or some such quaint program.
Call me a dreamer. I just don't see why a government can't rely solely on itself for support, or on itself mainly and its people marginally. If it could lower taxes, why not give it a try? What's there to lose? Could it really be any worse than what it already is?
|
|
|
Post by Phalon on Nov 1, 2009 5:29:12 GMT -6
Hhmmm....I don't think the general population is going to run out and buy arts and crafts created by government officials, Joxie. Unless, of course, they were hand-stitched effigies of themselves. I know quite a few people, for example, who'd pay to see our state governor get burned.
|
|
|
Deficit
Nov 1, 2009 19:18:00 GMT -6
Post by Mini Mia on Nov 1, 2009 19:18:00 GMT -6
Granted, the auctioned off items would have to be of good quality, and pleasing to the eye. And surely, there is _some_ talent in the fold _somewhere_. Or perhaps the lack thereof is why they're in politics.
|
|
|
Deficit
Nov 1, 2009 19:37:25 GMT -6
Post by Mini Mia on Nov 1, 2009 19:37:25 GMT -6
How about a CD/DVD with government officials (& families) singing Christmas songs? And the proceeds goes towards the deficit? 1 How about a DVD of the Obama's first Thanksgiving/Christmas in the White House, and the proceeds goes towards the deficit? 2 How about government officials auction off an hour-long visit with him/her and the proceeds goes towards the deficit? 3 How about government officials write up heartwarming stories for a book collection of memoirs, and the proceeds goes towards the deficit? 4
How many government officials does it take to change a light bulb? 5
S * P * O * I * L * E * R * * * S * P * A * C * E
Let me get back to you on that. I don't have the time or the resources right now. 6
|
|
|
Post by moonglum on Nov 2, 2009 0:14:09 GMT -6
How many government officials does it take to change a light bulb? "Well, Mr. Prime Minster/President. We'll have to employ an independant specialist to set up a commision to look into the feasability of such a proposal. The commision would then report back to the advisory council who would in turn advise the cabinet." "Should have an answer for you by 2011"
|
|
|
Post by vox on Nov 2, 2009 0:39:35 GMT -6
Oh! and Mr President, don't forget the Health & Safety Commission should be advised!
|
|