Hacker News Reader

Comment by thaumaturgy | Hacker News Reader

Supply-side economists, take note.

Unfortunately, they will take note of it as "run the government like a business", which tends to be how supply-side economists would prefer the government to be run anyway.

They want lower revenues for the government. I would hope that it's not the same philosophy for their businesses.

They also want a smaller scope for the government. So it's not like saying 'I want to run this business but bring in less money', it's more like saying 'I want to run a smaller business, so what departments can we do without'. Smaller business may actually make more profit (read: be more efficient) than the larger one.

I try not to claim a political preference left or right[1], but to prevent confusion I do feel they're trying to make this 'business' much smaller than it needs to be.

[1] My political preference is merely that politicans are like diapers. They need to be changed regularly, and for the same reason.

Does part of corporate "efficiency" include billions of dollars in bonuses?

That doesn't seem very efficient to me. The effect of large bonuses on the cost of administration seems a bit high.

No, they want spending to be less than or equal to revenues. That's the only rational way to run a business.

"That's the only rational way to run a business."

Actually, it's not - ask any business that's taken funding, borrowed to invest, or even run an overdraft as part of their low season. Spending less than or equal to revenues is one way to run a business, especially a small business that you only intend to grow incrementally (if at all). Borrowing to invest for faster growth is a very rational way to run a business in many situations (market opportunity, large personal vision etc).

Again, I'm just addressing the business analogy - here's my politics disclaimer http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822770

To clarify, I meant over the long term. If you're not making profits or at least breaking even over the long term (spending <= revenues), you're out of business.

The problem with the US is that they aren't just borrowing in a low season, they're borrowing every season.

If my business could borrow at the same rates as the US government I would take on as much debt as possible, in perpetuity.

But you would properly build or create something with it.

That is the problem the US have -- they don't create anything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com