3 ms·

"Think about it from a business perspective. What makes you more money? Cutting costs, or increasing revenues? And what is a more sustainable practice to increa

"Think about it from a business perspective. What makes you more money? Cutting costs, or increasing revenues? And what is a more sustainable practice to increase revenues: price gouging, or increasing volume?" That assumes you want to run the country/government like a business. I think that's a fairly large assumption.

Mikeb85 11y ago
> That assumes you want to run the country/government like a business. I think that's a fairly large assumption. The main difference between running a country and a business, is values and also means. Countries value certain qualitative indicators more than a typical business would (quality of life, crime, safety, etc...), and countries have more means to balance the books (things like printing money, ownership of resources, etc...). Talking about money at small-business scale is more about simplifying the concepts, but to a certain degree, it applies.
- andybak 11y ago
  The main difference between running a country and a business is that quite possibly the common sense assumptions that work at one scale don't hold at the other. Economics is often counter-intuitive - especially at a global scale. People extrapolate their intuitions from household economics to national level and beyond. There's no guarantee that any of our assumptions are still valid when you consider the entire world as one closed system.
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
Well, you can go part way. In a business, there are investments, and there are expenses. Both involve spending money. What's the difference? Investments pay you back, and expenses don't. There really isn't a problem with government making genuine investments. Needed infrastructure is a great example. They actually do pay even the government back, in the form of increased tax revenue. The problem is that government often says that something is investment, but it's really just expenses. Bridges to nowhere, and a blizzard of other pork. But government decides where to spend via politics, not rational economic analysis, and so government spending is much less efficient than the label says. Government should borrow to invest in the country. The problem is getting them not to borrow to throw the money away on political boondoggles.

Mikeb85 11y ago

> That assumes you want to run the country/government like a business. I think that's a fairly large assumption. The main difference between running a country and a business, is values and also means. Countries value certain qualitative indicators more than a typical business would (quality of life, crime, safety, etc...), and countries have more means to balance the books (things like printing money, ownership of resources, etc...). Talking about money at small-business scale is more about simplifying the concepts, but to a certain degree, it applies.

andybak 11y ago
The main difference between running a country and a business is that quite possibly the common sense assumptions that work at one scale don't hold at the other. Economics is often counter-intuitive - especially at a global scale. People extrapolate their intuitions from household economics to national level and beyond. There's no guarantee that any of our assumptions are still valid when you consider the entire world as one closed system.

AnimalMuppet 11y ago

Well, you can go part way. In a business, there are investments, and there are expenses. Both involve spending money. What's the difference? Investments pay you back, and expenses don't. There really isn't a problem with government making genuine investments. Needed infrastructure is a great example. They actually do pay even the government back, in the form of increased tax revenue. The problem is that government often says that something is investment, but it's really just expenses. Bridges to nowhere, and a blizzard of other pork. But government decides where to spend via politics, not rational economic analysis, and so government spending is much less efficient than the label says. Government should borrow to invest in the country. The problem is getting them not to borrow to throw the money away on political boondoggles.