17 ms·

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

yumraj 8y ago
Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are. Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done.
- lukifer 8y ago
  Trump isn’t really a business person, he just plays one on TV :P
- dev_dull 8y ago
  A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?
  - akhilcacharya 8y ago
    It was booming in 2016 too.
  - jkestner 8y ago
    The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.
    - briandear 8y ago
      Who are “shareholders?” Pretty much anyone with a retirement plan or a pension. The majority of Americans own stock.
      - jkestner 8y ago
        Not quite. 54% of the 135M American workers have a retirement plan.[1] That's 73M out of the ~250M American adults. Maybe you can call that the middle class. But point taken. To be less pithy, these individual shareholders have little power to sway governance, particularly if their stock is held in a managed fund. The rich, connected shareholders steer things, and it's not always in the interests of the company in the long term. 1. http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many...
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        The vast majority of Americans derive the lion’s share of their income over most of their lifetime from selling their labor, not from capital returns, whether from stock alone or any other combination of capital.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    That is such a joke. What does "booming economy" really mean? Mostly the stock market, I think. And "low unemployment"? It's low because people who have given up looking aren't counted. And because it includes lots of short-term and poorly compensated jobs.
  - jrs235 8y ago
    "low inflation" ... not if you include assets (stocks, houses, education, health[care], etc.) that are not included in the "official" inflation calculations.
  - dmode 8y ago
    Unemployment, economy, stock market, GDP - all have been on the exact same trajectory post the 2009 recession. We would have been exactly here even if a tree was the President. The only thing that got worse economically was the Federal deficit, which is a trillion dollars now.
  - noelsusman 8y ago
    That's more thanks to the Fed than anything else, though their role is also pretty small. The truth is the president doesn't have the ability to affect the economy very much one way or the other.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  Trump is a business person in the same way that the Kardashians are business people. They have businesses, but they are, first and foremost, celebrities.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  Arguably, Donald Trump is more of a media celebrity through inherited wealth that was funneled through mock business transactions for tax evasion than an actual businessman the way Yang is, but I'm not sure people are prepared to make the distinction, so that might be an effective political line against Yang even if it's not all that true in any relevant sense.
- Octoth0rpe 8y ago
  > work across the aisle and actually get things done If the proposed action is part of / agreeable with the $opposing_party platform, I don't think I _want_ it to get done; with extraordinarily few exceptions. I'd prefer someone who can push forward without compromising the point of the platform.
- core-questions 8y ago
  The problem here comes when there's no possible state of compromise that would make even anyone at all happy. For example, on a border wall: you build it to be functional, or you don't. A non-functional border wall is essentially not a border wall. There's no compromise state; instead, there's at best some kind of tit-for-tat, where you'll concede something else in exchange for your most important plans.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    A non-functional border wall also pleases nobody. It’s not a great compromise at all.
  - learc83 8y ago
    That's because a border wall is too specific for a policy platform. The more general concept of border security provides plenty of room for compromise. But even a wall provides room for compromise--physical barriers in some places but not others.
- justaguyhere 8y ago
  Also, didn't we just elect another business person One with multiple bankruptcies too!
- erentz 8y ago
  > Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done. To work with someone across the aisle you have to have someone on the other side of the aisle who wants to work with you. The republicans have made it absolutely clear over the past decade that they will not work with Democrats. Centrist Democrats need work with their colleagues to their left if they want to accomplish anything.
jakestein 8y ago
I think you're referring to Venture for America, which despite the name is not a venture capital firm. https://ventureforamerica.org https://ventureforamerica.org
motivated_gear 8y ago
Why though? I would like my government to be open to at least listening to lots of different ideas and applying an investment mindset to them. You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. But you dont need that to initiate groundbreaking projects. Hoover didn't pour concrete at the Hoover Dam. Kennedy didn't know the rocket equation.
- Octoth0rpe 8y ago
  > You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. Operational experience is not my concern. > applying an investment mindset to them This is my concern. I don't trust people in the VC industry to have a healthy concept of an investment mindset.
  - motivated_gear 8y ago
    Understood. Would like to hear your thoughts on why VC does not have a healthy investment philosophy.
themgt 8y ago
I'm taking a wait-and-see approach in general, but I do find Yang one of the most interesting candidates so far. Just to respond to this specific point, Yang wrote recently on Twitter [1]: There are lessons and principles that government can take from business - like treating customers well and resource efficiency. But anyone who says they are going to “run government like a business” is dumb. They require very different forms of leadership. As a CEO you can pretty much tell people what to do. You are their boss. You are paying them. If you say we are doing something then it generally happens. The downside is no one tells you unpleasant truths. In government most all of the time you are building consensus. You provide a vision and try to rally people around it. You build relationships. You compromise. You appeal to common goals. Things often happen more gradually. But when big things happen they can improve many lives. [1] https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432 https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432
- sqs 8y ago
  Are you a CEO? What you say about being a CEO doesn’t ring true to me.
  - clojurestan 8y ago
    Andrew Yang, the person being quoted, has been CEO of multiple companies
  - hjek 8y ago
    It's a quote.
- awinder 8y ago
  > like treating customers well This has come up with the current president's most-dimwitted son and it's so hysterical it bears repeating. US taxpayers and voters are not the customer. They're the board.
  - wgerard 8y ago
    Don't take this as a tacit defense of whichever son it was by any means, but: There are plenty of situations where the interaction between the government <-> constituents is very much like a business <-> customer relationship, and it's not totally insane to think that it could be a better/friendlier/more efficient one. Example: Interactions with TSA, IRS, DMVs (state government obviously but a government nonetheless), etc. I get what you're saying, but I think you also have to understand what Andrew Yang is implying (not particularly interested in looking up the quote from whichever son).
rdiddly 8y ago
I'm not so sympathetic to that idea in the first place. A business, particularly a corporation, is one of the most authoritarian structures ever devised. If the government were like a business, every citizen would be either an asset to be exploited or a liability to be eliminated.
- omalleyt 8y ago
  Citizens would be the shareholders
  - dsr_ 8y ago
    Small shareholders (less than 0.01% holdings) have essentially no voice in a corporation's policy; nor are they a consideration for the board of directors. Sometimes they are the beneficiaries of policies that are satisfying major stockholders, but not in a big way. No, this metaphor does not work.
  - qntty 8y ago
    In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.
    - Gibbon1 8y ago
      Despite the common wisdom governments tend to care a lot about citizens bitching. A friend used to work as a lawyer for a state utility board. They sit and listen to rants by 75 year old cat ladies and then consider how to mollify them.
    - rabidrat 8y ago
      So who gets the majority of shares in the country? Should it be the executives, or the funders? Maybe we should have a 1 vote per tax-dollar system.
      - 0815test 8y ago
markn951 8y ago
Andrew Yang has never worked for a VC as far as I can tell. What are you referring to?
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business" I really don't want a government that ruthlessly cuts costs that don't drive revenue and uses all mechanisms within reach to maximize lock-in and extract monopoly rents from customers.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Wasn't that a Trump campaign theme? But anyway, it's not new. That was a lot of that maybe a century ago in the US.
  - mrguyorama 8y ago
    That was the words that came out of Trump's mouth, but not what his supporters heard
fullshark 8y ago
How about Real Estate?
objektif 8y ago
His primary business was a test prep company he sold to Kaplan. As far as I know he did not own or work for a VC firm.
smallgovt 8y ago
This comment doesn't make sense since Andrew Yang has no background in venture capital.
losvedir 8y ago
I don't think his business really is venture capital, though. What exactly are you referring to? At least, if you're talking about Venture for America, it's more of a YC or TechStars. It's a non-profit designed to help entrepreneurs start companies. Prior to that, I think he was the CEO of Manhattan Prep before it getting acquired by Kaplan.
justaguyhere 8y ago
I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?
- asark 8y ago
  When invoked by laypersons, it usually means "don't run a deficit at all, and cut 'useless' (to me, so far as I know) programs". Arts funding and foreign aid are popular first candidates for the chopping block. I don't know what it means when politicians say it, aside from being an appeal to the above. Possibly they mean the same thing. [EDIT] incidentally, it's almost entirely associated with the Right. Unusual to see it brought up as a point in favor of a Democrat. [EDIT EDIT] awinder probably nailed what it means when politicians say it, and/or why it's an idea some of them have promoted.
- luckydata 8y ago
  It's one of the idiotic side effects of unchecked capitalistic culture in the USA mixed with a tinge of anti-intellecutalism and tons of garden variety ignorance and racism. It's codeword for "I don't want my taxes to help folks that don't look like me".
- specialist 8y ago
  Capitalism is our religion. It’s so much a part of our culture (identity), people aren’t aware of it.
  - Gibbon1 8y ago
    People that are heavily corrupted respond to criticism of neoliberalism/capitalism the same way fundamentalists respond to heresy.
- awinder 8y ago
  One of the major political factions in the US has spent decades at this point deriding career politicians. It's been a decent strategy inside of that faction, but other factions point out that career politicians actually develop tools to get shit done (as any career-minded individual would). So at some point you have to combat the argument that you're running inexperienced individuals vs. experienced individuals, and advancing the argument that "business leadership actually exceeds govt leadership in getting stuff done" is an attempt to turn that weakness into a strength. I'm being charitable that no one actually believes that garbage at it's heart, but the other explanation might be garden-variety insanity.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
>but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital. Or being the activist investor that breaks up the business and sells what's profitable.
ams6110 8y ago
"Run the government like a business" was Ross Perot's mantra. Was quite popular for a while, but didn't work out so well in the end. That's probably more because he sort of went insane during the campaign rather than due to a a reasoned choice the voters made about that philosophy.
maxxxxx 8y ago
"elect a business person so they can run government like a business" This is a terrible idea for a society. Typical businesses are internally dictatorships that are single-minded, intolerant of dissent, very controlling (my employer reads my E-mails and lately they are setting up a ton of cameras) and are designed to funnel rewards to only few people. That's not a good mindset to run a whole country. We can't just lay off people to cut costs. I think that's why Trump seems to get better along with dictators like Erdogan, Putin or Kim Jong Un than with democratic leaders. their leadership is much closer to what he is used from his business. Running government more efficiently would be nice but I don't see the ex-business people who got elected into government do better than other politicians.
Alex3917 8y ago
He doesn't want to run the government like a business, and he's not a venture capitalist.
vharuck 8y ago
A government run like a business loses the most important and necessary quality of a government: it can takr actions that are economically harmful to itself but helpful to society. It should maintain all roads, not just the ones used to transport goods. It should investigate even small crimes. It steps in when the market would cause a catastrophe (e.g., tragedy of the commons). Of course, money still exists, so the government restricts its reach within a budget. Besides, the president's only tasks should be international diplomacy, commander of the military, and doing what the Congress says. They can be "ideas gals/guys," but he/she shouldn't be independently making huge decisions outside of war scenarios. That doesn't sound like a CEO to me.
0815test 8y ago
> elect a business person so they can run government like a business I mean, didn't we try that already, and quite recently for that matter? It doesn't seem to be working very well. What makes you think that Yang can do better than that?

yumraj 8y ago

Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are. Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done.

lukifer 8y ago
Trump isn’t really a business person, he just plays one on TV :P
dev_dull 8y ago
A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?
- akhilcacharya 8y ago
  It was booming in 2016 too.
- jkestner 8y ago
  The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.
  - briandear 8y ago
    Who are “shareholders?” Pretty much anyone with a retirement plan or a pension. The majority of Americans own stock.
    - jkestner 8y ago
      Not quite. 54% of the 135M American workers have a retirement plan.[1] That's 73M out of the ~250M American adults. Maybe you can call that the middle class. But point taken. To be less pithy, these individual shareholders have little power to sway governance, particularly if their stock is held in a managed fund. The rich, connected shareholders steer things, and it's not always in the interests of the company in the long term. 1. http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many...
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      The vast majority of Americans derive the lion’s share of their income over most of their lifetime from selling their labor, not from capital returns, whether from stock alone or any other combination of capital.
- mirimir 8y ago
  That is such a joke. What does "booming economy" really mean? Mostly the stock market, I think. And "low unemployment"? It's low because people who have given up looking aren't counted. And because it includes lots of short-term and poorly compensated jobs.
- jrs235 8y ago
  "low inflation" ... not if you include assets (stocks, houses, education, health[care], etc.) that are not included in the "official" inflation calculations.
- dmode 8y ago
  Unemployment, economy, stock market, GDP - all have been on the exact same trajectory post the 2009 recession. We would have been exactly here even if a tree was the President. The only thing that got worse economically was the Federal deficit, which is a trillion dollars now.
- noelsusman 8y ago
  That's more thanks to the Fed than anything else, though their role is also pretty small. The truth is the president doesn't have the ability to affect the economy very much one way or the other.
toasterlovin 8y ago
Trump is a business person in the same way that the Kardashians are business people. They have businesses, but they are, first and foremost, celebrities.
dragonwriter 8y ago
Arguably, Donald Trump is more of a media celebrity through inherited wealth that was funneled through mock business transactions for tax evasion than an actual businessman the way Yang is, but I'm not sure people are prepared to make the distinction, so that might be an effective political line against Yang even if it's not all that true in any relevant sense.
Octoth0rpe 8y ago
> work across the aisle and actually get things done If the proposed action is part of / agreeable with the $opposing_party platform, I don't think I _want_ it to get done; with extraordinarily few exceptions. I'd prefer someone who can push forward without compromising the point of the platform.
core-questions 8y ago
The problem here comes when there's no possible state of compromise that would make even anyone at all happy. For example, on a border wall: you build it to be functional, or you don't. A non-functional border wall is essentially not a border wall. There's no compromise state; instead, there's at best some kind of tit-for-tat, where you'll concede something else in exchange for your most important plans.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  A non-functional border wall also pleases nobody. It’s not a great compromise at all.
- learc83 8y ago
  That's because a border wall is too specific for a policy platform. The more general concept of border security provides plenty of room for compromise. But even a wall provides room for compromise--physical barriers in some places but not others.
justaguyhere 8y ago
Also, didn't we just elect another business person One with multiple bankruptcies too!
erentz 8y ago
> Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done. To work with someone across the aisle you have to have someone on the other side of the aisle who wants to work with you. The republicans have made it absolutely clear over the past decade that they will not work with Democrats. Centrist Democrats need work with their colleagues to their left if they want to accomplish anything.

jakestein 8y ago

I think you're referring to Venture for America, which despite the name is not a venture capital firm. https://ventureforamerica.org https://ventureforamerica.org

motivated_gear 8y ago

Why though? I would like my government to be open to at least listening to lots of different ideas and applying an investment mindset to them. You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. But you dont need that to initiate groundbreaking projects. Hoover didn't pour concrete at the Hoover Dam. Kennedy didn't know the rocket equation.

Octoth0rpe 8y ago
> You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. Operational experience is not my concern. > applying an investment mindset to them This is my concern. I don't trust people in the VC industry to have a healthy concept of an investment mindset.
- motivated_gear 8y ago
  Understood. Would like to hear your thoughts on why VC does not have a healthy investment philosophy.

themgt 8y ago

I'm taking a wait-and-see approach in general, but I do find Yang one of the most interesting candidates so far. Just to respond to this specific point, Yang wrote recently on Twitter [1]: There are lessons and principles that government can take from business - like treating customers well and resource efficiency. But anyone who says they are going to “run government like a business” is dumb. They require very different forms of leadership. As a CEO you can pretty much tell people what to do. You are their boss. You are paying them. If you say we are doing something then it generally happens. The downside is no one tells you unpleasant truths. In government most all of the time you are building consensus. You provide a vision and try to rally people around it. You build relationships. You compromise. You appeal to common goals. Things often happen more gradually. But when big things happen they can improve many lives. [1] https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432 https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432

sqs 8y ago
Are you a CEO? What you say about being a CEO doesn’t ring true to me.
- clojurestan 8y ago
  Andrew Yang, the person being quoted, has been CEO of multiple companies
- hjek 8y ago
  It's a quote.
awinder 8y ago
> like treating customers well This has come up with the current president's most-dimwitted son and it's so hysterical it bears repeating. US taxpayers and voters are not the customer. They're the board.
- wgerard 8y ago
  Don't take this as a tacit defense of whichever son it was by any means, but: There are plenty of situations where the interaction between the government <-> constituents is very much like a business <-> customer relationship, and it's not totally insane to think that it could be a better/friendlier/more efficient one. Example: Interactions with TSA, IRS, DMVs (state government obviously but a government nonetheless), etc. I get what you're saying, but I think you also have to understand what Andrew Yang is implying (not particularly interested in looking up the quote from whichever son).

rdiddly 8y ago

I'm not so sympathetic to that idea in the first place. A business, particularly a corporation, is one of the most authoritarian structures ever devised. If the government were like a business, every citizen would be either an asset to be exploited or a liability to be eliminated.

omalleyt 8y ago
Citizens would be the shareholders
- dsr_ 8y ago
  Small shareholders (less than 0.01% holdings) have essentially no voice in a corporation's policy; nor are they a consideration for the board of directors. Sometimes they are the beneficiaries of policies that are satisfying major stockholders, but not in a big way. No, this metaphor does not work.
- qntty 8y ago
  In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.
  - Gibbon1 8y ago
    Despite the common wisdom governments tend to care a lot about citizens bitching. A friend used to work as a lawyer for a state utility board. They sit and listen to rants by 75 year old cat ladies and then consider how to mollify them.
  - rabidrat 8y ago
    So who gets the majority of shares in the country? Should it be the executives, or the funders? Maybe we should have a 1 vote per tax-dollar system.
    - 0815test 8y ago

markn951 8y ago

Andrew Yang has never worked for a VC as far as I can tell. What are you referring to?

dragonwriter 8y ago

> I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business" I really don't want a government that ruthlessly cuts costs that don't drive revenue and uses all mechanisms within reach to maximize lock-in and extract monopoly rents from customers.

mirimir 8y ago
Wasn't that a Trump campaign theme? But anyway, it's not new. That was a lot of that maybe a century ago in the US.
- mrguyorama 8y ago
  That was the words that came out of Trump's mouth, but not what his supporters heard

fullshark 8y ago

How about Real Estate?

objektif 8y ago

His primary business was a test prep company he sold to Kaplan. As far as I know he did not own or work for a VC firm.

smallgovt 8y ago

This comment doesn't make sense since Andrew Yang has no background in venture capital.

losvedir 8y ago

I don't think his business really is venture capital, though. What exactly are you referring to? At least, if you're talking about Venture for America, it's more of a YC or TechStars. It's a non-profit designed to help entrepreneurs start companies. Prior to that, I think he was the CEO of Manhattan Prep before it getting acquired by Kaplan.

justaguyhere 8y ago

I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?

asark 8y ago
When invoked by laypersons, it usually means "don't run a deficit at all, and cut 'useless' (to me, so far as I know) programs". Arts funding and foreign aid are popular first candidates for the chopping block. I don't know what it means when politicians say it, aside from being an appeal to the above. Possibly they mean the same thing. [EDIT] incidentally, it's almost entirely associated with the Right. Unusual to see it brought up as a point in favor of a Democrat. [EDIT EDIT] awinder probably nailed what it means when politicians say it, and/or why it's an idea some of them have promoted.
luckydata 8y ago
It's one of the idiotic side effects of unchecked capitalistic culture in the USA mixed with a tinge of anti-intellecutalism and tons of garden variety ignorance and racism. It's codeword for "I don't want my taxes to help folks that don't look like me".
specialist 8y ago
Capitalism is our religion. It’s so much a part of our culture (identity), people aren’t aware of it.
- Gibbon1 8y ago
  People that are heavily corrupted respond to criticism of neoliberalism/capitalism the same way fundamentalists respond to heresy.
awinder 8y ago
One of the major political factions in the US has spent decades at this point deriding career politicians. It's been a decent strategy inside of that faction, but other factions point out that career politicians actually develop tools to get shit done (as any career-minded individual would). So at some point you have to combat the argument that you're running inexperienced individuals vs. experienced individuals, and advancing the argument that "business leadership actually exceeds govt leadership in getting stuff done" is an attempt to turn that weakness into a strength. I'm being charitable that no one actually believes that garbage at it's heart, but the other explanation might be garden-variety insanity.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

>but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital. Or being the activist investor that breaks up the business and sells what's profitable.

ams6110 8y ago

"Run the government like a business" was Ross Perot's mantra. Was quite popular for a while, but didn't work out so well in the end. That's probably more because he sort of went insane during the campaign rather than due to a a reasoned choice the voters made about that philosophy.

maxxxxx 8y ago

"elect a business person so they can run government like a business" This is a terrible idea for a society. Typical businesses are internally dictatorships that are single-minded, intolerant of dissent, very controlling (my employer reads my E-mails and lately they are setting up a ton of cameras) and are designed to funnel rewards to only few people. That's not a good mindset to run a whole country. We can't just lay off people to cut costs. I think that's why Trump seems to get better along with dictators like Erdogan, Putin or Kim Jong Un than with democratic leaders. their leadership is much closer to what he is used from his business. Running government more efficiently would be nice but I don't see the ex-business people who got elected into government do better than other politicians.

Alex3917 8y ago

He doesn't want to run the government like a business, and he's not a venture capitalist.

vharuck 8y ago

A government run like a business loses the most important and necessary quality of a government: it can takr actions that are economically harmful to itself but helpful to society. It should maintain all roads, not just the ones used to transport goods. It should investigate even small crimes. It steps in when the market would cause a catastrophe (e.g., tragedy of the commons). Of course, money still exists, so the government restricts its reach within a budget. Besides, the president's only tasks should be international diplomacy, commander of the military, and doing what the Congress says. They can be "ideas gals/guys," but he/she shouldn't be independently making huge decisions outside of war scenarios. That doesn't sound like a CEO to me.

0815test 8y ago

> elect a business person so they can run government like a business I mean, didn't we try that already, and quite recently for that matter? It doesn't seem to be working very well. What makes you think that Yang can do better than that?