3 Reasons Why Government Shouldn’t Be Run Like a Business

Here is a video from some friends running a web-site called the Minute MBA. This video I found quick and entertaining explaining the difference between government and business. I would see these concepts applying equally well to Indigenous peoples. Although I see there some fundamental differences between American and Western concepts about the role of business. For example if we take the Aboriginal concept of holism this would allow Indigenous leaders or First Nations to create employment by creating companies. Americans would say the government has no role in creating companaies and the economy should be run and directed by the market place. Because these First Nation or Metis companies operate under a First Nations Government they are owned by share holders or citizens of that First Nation. The common good then becomes that of the First Nation. These companies should never be run without the idea they are owned by share holders and not specific leaders. Dr Wanda Wuttunee talks about First Nation companies and many of the issues that they face.

To see the Video and Learn more
http://www.onlinemba.com/blog/video-why-government-should-not-run-like-a-business
transcript from video

1.  Profit vs. People: A corporation’s mission is to make profits. This isn’t just good business sense – it’s also a legally binding component of incorporating. Government’s mission is to to provide for all citizens through the “common good” – things like roads, schools, and police protection. In fact, if a government is profiting, then they are probably hoarding tax dollars for no good reason. Microsoft may be smart for keeping $36.1 billion in cash and liquid short-term investments, but the government would be letting people down if they sat on that much money and weren’t using it to keep the country running.
2. Shareholders vs. Citizens: There are 535 people in Congress, the President, and nine judges. All of these politicians and judges answer to over 300 million Americans. That’s a lot of decision makers, but it’s this system of checks and balances that works to ensure each person’s voice is heard. It isn’t perfect (lobbyists/special interests/and corruption still exist), but consider the alternative. As a minor shareholder in a major company you wouldn’t even have the opportunity to vote on major business decisions—like whether or not to remove a failing CEO.
3. Customers vs. Constituents: Companies have the luxury of dumping a line of business because it isn’t profitable or choose to streamline their offerings to serve just one sector of the population. Government agencies do not have this option. This is a good thing. Imagine if Apple ran the government. Fire and Police departments would only answer calls to the homes of twenty-something hipsters, we’d have to use iTunes to file our taxes, and all legal disputes would be resolved at the Genius Bar. It would be horrible.