View Full Version : You get what you pay for
ParrotHead
02-16-2006, 04:28 PM
Most of you know me and I know most of you and can attest to the fact that we usually sit around and gripe and moan about the political aspects within this country and how it effects each and everyone lives.
Well let’s put things into perspective and I think you’ll see that we are indeed getting exactly what we have paid for.
The company I work for has a CEO, a President – the man in charge and we pay that person quite a deal of money, millions of dollars to oversee our company. He has several direct reports that we pay quite a sum of money, several hundreds of thousands of dollars. And our business, our little company is doing pretty good, making a nice profit, employing people, everything needed to help generate a healthy economy.
Now as a taxpayer, we pay the CEO of our country a nominal fee at best. That CEO then in turns appropriates funds that pay his direct reports (ie. elected officials) what I would call a nice salary but not nearly worthy of the company they are running. Think about, the United States has a budget of $7 trillion dollars – only Bill Gates can fathom what $7 trillion dollars would be.
Ok you’re saying to yourself now “what your point PH?”
We need to start treating the country as a business and employee those that are most qualified to run this size of a business. Now I’m not advocating that we elect Bill Gates as President but think about this.
Most elected officials are people that couldn’t make it in the business world or the private sector. Next time you’re looking for you House Representative and Senate Rep., check out their profile. Most have been in politics all their lives and if they were in the private sector, most were only there for a short period of time and a lot of them were failures. BUT we continually elect people that couldn’t run a McDonalds or a 7-Eleven to run a country that has a $7 Trillion dollar budget!
You can gripe and moan all you want but I think we are getting exactly what we’re paying for…
Clay008
02-17-2006, 07:44 AM
I think you are making a good point ParrotHead. The fact that many of the people running this country have no idea how to manage a company to ensure that it runs efficiently and effectively. I am not sure how to fix it though because I would think many people suited for the job would not want the job. They don't want to have to deal with all the name calling and democrats said this and the republicans said this garbage. Plus they can make the big bucks working in the private sector. It seems like the Senators and Reps are to busy worried about re-election and party lines to actual work hard and help the working people of America.
Tominator
02-17-2006, 08:07 AM
Point taken, however, the president doesn't have near the control over the budget as your CEO, rather, it's more like 400 career politicians (just on the federal level) that couldn't run a 7-eleven, that are in control of the purse. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
slugshooter
02-17-2006, 09:10 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Most elected officials are people that couldn’t make it in the business world or the private sector.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is that why most of the people in Congress are millionaires. They must have done something good somewhere.
ParrotHead
02-17-2006, 10:48 AM
Most are millionaires? I’m not thinking that the majority of our house and senate elected officials are millionaires but I will agree that some have accumulated that much wealth through various ways, actually “working” for it can be debated.
Is Uncle Teddy a millionaire? Sure he is but can you honestly say he earned that million through working in the business world?
John Kerry married into his wealth and the witch he married never worked for what she has – unless you count lying on your back with your legs in the air working.
Hillary is quite a millionaire herself, especially after receiving $8 million to tell what it was like running the country and Bill all at the same time.
But you fail to get the point here. Running this country is like running a business – or it should be. You have a Profit and Loss Statement – in business it’s hopeful that the profits out weight the loses however in running the country, the loses are usually greater – thus we have a debt.
All I’m saying is – IF you were working for a company that had a budget of $7 Trillion dollars and your livelihood depended on them running that company in a manner that it stayed in business – how many people in the house, senate and white house do you think would actually be qualified to run that business?
slugshooter
02-17-2006, 12:25 PM
I got your point in the original post on this topic. The country should be run like a business and the people working for it should know what they are doing. Unfortunately, I think it's a lot more complicated than that, mainly because a business has one set goal, whether they manufacture something or provide some type of service. There are many, many things that go into running this country, I guess you could think of it as a multiconglomerate.
As far as personal wealth for Senators and Reps, thats a whole different thread that I would be more than happy to start. I might add that you did a wonderful job picking out Democratic legislators with money, not that there aren't any Republicans in Congress who are filfthy rich.
buckee
02-17-2006, 01:17 PM
I think running a country like a business, would be a very bad idea.
Most big businesses these days sacrifice, morality for profit. The only thing that means anything to them is Profit, and they'll get it any way they can.
Also, a big company is willing to sacrifice anything, to make sure it runs smoothly. That sounds pretty Liberal, if ya ask me http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Companies these days make products, that break-down rather quickly on purpose. It keeps their service dept. in business. Not like the old days, when things were built to last. Seems like the more gizmos and gadget they can add to a product these days, the busier it keeps their service departments and continues making them money.
I think we have enough gizmos and gadgets now in government, that don't work. We don't need more.
EKYhunter
02-17-2006, 04:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Most are millionaires? I’m not thinking that the majority of our house and senate elected officials are millionaires but I will agree that some have accumulated that much wealth through various ways, actually “working” for it can be debated.
How about Tom Delay?
Is Uncle Teddy a millionaire? Sure he is but can you honestly say he earned that million through working in the business world?
John Kerry married into his wealth and the witch he married never worked for what she has – unless you count lying on your back with your legs in the air working.
Hillary is quite a millionaire herself, especially after receiving $8 million to tell what it was like running the country and Bill all at the same time.
But you fail to get the point here. Running this country is like running a business – or it should be. You have a Profit and Loss Statement – in business it’s hopeful that the profits out weight the loses however in running the country, the loses are usually greater – thus we have a debt.
All I’m saying is – IF you were working for a company that had a budget of $7 Trillion dollars and your livelihood depended on them running that company in a manner that it stayed in business – how many people in the house, senate and white house do you think would actually be qualified to run that business?
[/ QUOTE ]
How about Tom Delay?
wtnhunt
02-19-2006, 07:49 AM
Good point PH, have to agree with Steve though.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.