Jared Kushner says government should be run like a company

[pgwenthold]

Also keep in mind that most businesses ultimately fail, efficiently run or not, due to other circumstances. Meanwhile, the government cannot fail, and has to deal with the losses.

HHGregg was a successful business for a long time. It no longer is. So it closes up shop all over in an effort to improve profitability, to the point of bankruptcy The government can't do that. It has services that it needs to provide, even if they aren't profitable.

 

[blutoski]

Also keep in mind that most businesses ultimately fail, efficiently run or not, due to other circumstances. Meanwhile, the government cannot fail, and has to deal with the losses.

HHGregg was a successful business for a long time. It no longer is. So it closes up shop all over in an effort to improve profitability, to the point of bankruptcy The government can't do that. It has services that it needs to provide, even if they aren't profitable.

The main circumstance is that somebody is doing it better or cheaper, usually both.

The analogy in Government is that nations compete against each other economically or militarily, and sometimes one is ended.


What's interesting is that I have always regarded governments and corporations as equally threatening to the mass population's standard of living. They are our early versions of AI. Decision making machines with no moral capacity.

The prospect of unifying them into one entity (such as the White House as a division of Trump Enterprises) is pretty much at the top of my list of worst case scenarios.

 

[rustypouch]

Because it lowers the taxes for everyone. Including the people in government. They pay taxes, too. And if they waste money, they lose their job.

"The government" is "we the people." What is thexpected incentive for "we the people" to be more efficient?

But that means fewer jobs, less people employed.

Why do you want to increase unemployment?

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 

[Trebuchet]

Bad idea.

Did you ever work for a family owned company when you were not a member of the family? Family and friends are valued much more than competence.

Even in publicly owned companies - in some cases loyalty is valued much more than competence.

Hence Mr & Mrs Kushners' positions in the US government.

 

[blutoski]

But that means fewer jobs, less people employed.

Why do you want to increase unemployment?

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

I wonder if in this example, the people who would lose their job wouldn't be the elected representatives.

If there's a business analogy, with voters as the share owners, Congress would be the Board of Directors. If the 'company' underperforms, it's time for a new Board.

But here we are...

 

[Foolmewunz]

Talk about taking things waaaayyyyy too literally . . .

Ah the patticake excuse for All Things Trump. "You can't take it literally."


Why the **** not? These idiots, by hook and/or crook (more often the latter) get into the most prestigious schools in the country. Is it too much to ask that they learn the lingua franca of the country. If you don't mean that America should be run just like a great American corporation, then don't say it. Stop looking for simplistic hyperbole and sound bytes. A government is not a business. Period. That's why at school you have "The School of Business" and then you have "The School of International Relations, of Political Science, etc...".

The only person in the administration less qualified for his job than Jared is Trump. Silver spoons who got into colleges based on legacies and donations and having zero experience to bring to bear in their new positions.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Did you ever work for a family owned company when you were not a member of the family?

Yeah, it suxored.

That's why at school you have "The School of Business" and then you have "The School of International Relations, of Political Science, etc...".

Yeah. But they do get the same school tie when they graduate.

 

[fuelair]

Bad idea.

Did you ever work for a family owned company when you were not a member of the family? Family and friends are valued much more than competence.

Even in publicly owned companies - in some cases loyalty is valued much more than competence.

JK osculates red raw rectums. Or raw red ones - not sure which is the correct order!!!!!!!!!

 

[lomiller]

Q: what form of government is run like a company?
A: A Monarchy

Personally, I think it might be better to treat the citizens as shareholders. If we're only customers, who are the shareholders?

Shareholders don’t have a lot of power in most publically traded companies due to the very limited information they have access to on the company’s internal workings. The real power is held either by the CEO or the Board of directors.

Side note, but Adam Smith, the father of free market thinking spent a large amount of his time arguing against corporations because he felt that the agents running them would work in their own interest rather than that of the owners/shareholders. I’m not sure his final conclusion that corporations should be illegal were completely correct but his criticism certainly was valid.

 

[Spindrift]

Pick an agency. It's bloated.

Look at this Organization Chart for the EPA -more like multiple pages of multiple charts. You don't find many businesses with such extensive charts. How many of those positions could be combined? How effective are the various branches at carrying out their tasks? Are the goals of the agency worth the expense being spent to achieve them? These are questions any successful business asks itself every day because it's existence depends on answering them correctly. Government agencies have no such motivation; their funding comes whether they are doing any good or not. And in the case of the EPA, the Flint Water crisis is a good indicator that they aren't very good at what they do.

Why do people think that because looking for efficiencies and self-examination are good business practices that many businesses actually do them? Most businesses are too busy conducting their business to really think about, never mind implement changes.

I once consulted at a very large insurance company. In the IT department they had about 1100 employees. One of my company's tasks was to assemble the org chart for the department. It took 3 months to figure out. Over 200 of those 1100 employees had the title of Vice President in varying forms (Associate VP, Exec VP, Asst VP, etc.) At least 40 VPs had no one reporting to them. Some people reported directly to as many as three people. After suggesting various ways to re-organize they decided to do nothing but they paid us a lot of money and hired us for other work. And the company was and is very profitable.

 

[3point14]

Why do people think that because looking for efficiencies and self-examination are good business practices that many businesses actually do them? Most businesses are too busy conducting their business to really think about, never mind implement changes.

We're back to the oft-cited myth that private is more efficient than public.

I work at the coal face in a company that sounds startlingly similar to the one you describe below. I can tell you that efficiency and process improvement goes right out of the window. Most of the time we're just trying to get the job done with inadequate resource and/or support.

I once consulted at a very large insurance company. In the IT department they had about 1100 employees. One of my company's tasks was to assemble the org chart for the department. It took 3 months to figure out. Over 200 of those 1100 employees had the title of Vice President in varying forms (Associate VP, Exec VP, Asst VP, etc.) At least 40 VPs had no one reporting to them. Some people reported directly to as many as three people. After suggesting various ways to re-organize they decided to do nothing but they paid us a lot of money and hired us for other work. And the company was and is very profitable.

 

[Planigale]

I agree with the principle that government should be run more like a business, especially in the sense that each individual agency should be. The goals of each agency should be 1)Excellent service to the citizens it serves; 2)A focus on increasing efficiency and reducing expenditures; 3)A focus on returning dividends (tax savings) to it's shareholders (taxpayers).

I see absolutely nothing controversial in this simple idea and I'm pretty sure that's what Kushner was getting at.

In a business you can sell or close loss making divisions. Now I am not familiar with the internal economy of the US but as an example should the US government sell off Dakota (N&S), as a non profit centre? What about the US army clear loss maker, perhaps Putin would like to buy it? Given the debt what happens if China forecloses?

Which companies can literally print their own money? Or lock up or kill compettors?

Most countries have been in business for longer than most corporations, many have more customer loyalty than big corporations (who will put their life on the line to defend Walmart against a takeover?). This might indicate they are more successful than corporations.

Some of what they teach in business school could be applied to some aspects of government, but some aspects of good government (e.g. morality trumps profit) might be incorporated into business.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

The government should be run like a great American company.

If Donald Trump runs the government like he ran his great American companies, the government will declare bankruptcy.

That makes Trump smart.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Why do people think that because looking for efficiencies and self-examination are good business practices that many businesses actually do them? Most businesses are too busy conducting their business to really think about, never mind implement changes.

I once consulted at a very large insurance company. In the IT department they had about 1100 employees. One of my company's tasks was to assemble the org chart for the department. It took 3 months to figure out. Over 200 of those 1100 employees had the title of Vice President in varying forms (Associate VP, Exec VP, Asst VP, etc.) At least 40 VPs had no one reporting to them. Some people reported directly to as many as three people. After suggesting various ways to re-organize they decided to do nothing but they paid us a lot of money and hired us for other work. And the company was and is very profitable.

Indeed. In some ways, it is better to think of <n> employees starting their day and working through it alone, guided by some <xyz> understanding of what they are to do. Making sure <xyz> made sense to each and was properly formulated and aligned was often the quickest way to improve, and yet remain an organizational "mess" in any formal terms. This is especially true of fluid environments with mixed roles, as in IT. At one firm, making sure the right programming methodology was consistently adopted at the level of ad-hoc teams made more sense than trying to reform a fixed org structure, for example.

 

[Donal]

Pick an agency. It's bloated.

Look at this Organization Chart for the EPA -more like multiple pages of multiple charts.

So?

You don't find many businesses with such extensive charts.

You don't find many with 15,000+ employees

How many of those positions could be combined? How effective are the various branches at carrying out their tasks? Are the goals of the agency worth the expense being spent to achieve them? These are questions any successful business asks itself every day because it's existence depends on answering them correctly.

You assume no agency or government employee ever does that?

Government agencies have no such motivation; their funding comes whether they are doing any good or not.

I'm not sure where you get your information. What exactly do you think politicians mean when they make claims about "cutting spending"?

And in the case of the EPA, the Flint Water crisis is a good indicator that they aren't very good at what they do.

Actually, the EPA were the first ones to notice the problem and try to act on it. The local director didn't move fast enough because she didn't want to step on the state's toes. But, she resigned over it. Keep in mind, the states are in charge of their own water supplies. The EPA repeatedly told the local officials (including the private company in charge oft he change over) about it, but were told to pound sand.

If anything, it is an example of needing to give federal agencies broader scopes.

Meanwhile, in corporate America, severance packages are structured in such a way that companies are afraid to fire executives, no matter how grossly incompetent. see: United Airlines, Uber, Yahoo, TimeWarner etc etc

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Definitely not; I don't think it's possible to run every facet of government like a business. But process improvements like these are exactly what businesses do and what too few government agencies do. I think that this is the kind of thing Trump/Kushner have in mind rather than attempting to run the entire government as a business.

Do you have any quotes or other evidence from Trump/Kushner that would convince anyone else that that this is what they have in mind ?

 

[WilliamSeger]

Running the country like a business? According to a "well-connected Republican operative, the Trump kids pressured daddy to dump Bannon because they thought he was hurting the Trump brand name:

Trump’s three oldest children — Donald Jr., Ivanka and Eric — and Kushner have been frustrated by the impression of chaos inside the White House and feel that their father has not always been served well by his senior staff, according to people with knowledge of their sentiments. The Trump heirs are interested in any changes that might help resuscitate the presidency and preserve the family’s name at a time when they are trying to expand the Trump Organization’s portfolio of hotels.


“The fundamental assessment is that if they want to win the White House in 2020, they’re not going to do it the way they did in 2016, because the family brand would not sustain the collateral damage,” said one well-connected Republican operative, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the president’s family. “It would be so protectionist, nationalist and backward-looking that they’d only be able to build in Oklahoma City or the Ozarks.”

 

[blutoski]

Why do people think that because looking for efficiencies and self-examination are good business practices that many businesses actually do them? Most businesses are too busy conducting their business to really think about, never mind implement changes.

I'm constantly reminding our customer facing business units about this. Small business customers really do need some hand holding, even about the basics in their own vertical. I remember keeping a tally when I was in sales, and over a year, only 5% of small business customers even knew the legal name of their business.

The sole proprietor who operates his subway franchise is good at a few things, but a management professional he is not. He would not last a minute in a public corporation.

And that's one reason I saw the same names over and over in the Loyalty reports. Many businesses have serial bankruptcy as their profitability model. Run up a tab with the suppliers, but who cares if you've already paid yourself $250k and got a year of expensed Mercedes.

I once consulted at a very large insurance company. In the IT department they had about 1100 employees. One of my company's tasks was to assemble the org chart for the department. It took 3 months to figure out. Over 200 of those 1100 employees had the title of Vice President in varying forms (Associate VP, Exec VP, Asst VP, etc.) At least 40 VPs had no one reporting to them. Some people reported directly to as many as three people. After suggesting various ways to re-organize they decided to do nothing but they paid us a lot of money and hired us for other work. And the company was and is very profitable.

We used to have the "last supper rule" whereby every manager had to have at least 12 direct reports. This led to too many levels, so in the interest of flattening it, there was a year where at one point I had 110 direct reports. My workload changed from operational analysis and process improvement, to just keeping up with normal operations - coaching repeat tardies, and scheduling one on ones. I don't know how they thought this was a better use of resources.

 

[blutoski]

Running the country like a business? According to a "well-connected Republican operative, the Trump kids pressured daddy to dump Bannon because they thought he was hurting the Trump brand name:

To be honest, I think this was clear even before the election, as he used the campaign to promote his brand on a regular basis.

The first time I heard him refer to Mar-a-Lago as the Winter Whitehouse, even some of my Trumpie friends had to admit that he's the Grifter In Chief.

 

[mgidm86]

When I hear people say "run the country more like a business", to me it means stop wasting cash and try to stay within a budget.

It means caring about how much money is being wasted and doing something to fix it. Increasing debt is a recipe for failure for any entity, business or otherwise.

I agree that people are taking the statement too literally, but I also believe they actually know what Jared meant and are complaining anyways because he's related to Trump.