Every government, large and small, every company from a one-person operation to vast international corporate empires must be efficient in their performance. All charitable organizations and non-profit enterprises must insist on individual and group productivity to survive. Organizations that don’t take productivity seriously either disappear over time or figure out a way to dupe customers, contributors and benefactors into believing things are going along swimmingly.
Here’s an example of deceit by a partnership (conspiracy) of government (subsidies) and business. Solar City of San Mateo, CA lost $61 million over the past six months. However, they boast that sales will increase between 70% and 90% next year. The only way that Solar City can survive and thrive economically is by federal and state government’s gifts of tax breaks and subsidies. Yet the stock has risen recently to $57 per share increasing Chairman Elon Musk’s net worth to over $5 billion.
Mr. Musk is also the CEO of Tesla, the subsidized electric car company located in Palo Alto, CA. The subsidies that allowed Mr. Musk to become very rich came from the taxes wrested from hard-working middle class citizens and distributed to political friends and contributors.
Here’s what can happen when a company suffers from lagging productivity: In 2007, Goodyear planned changes in their production facilities in Amiens, France. Members of CGT, the communist-leaning union, rejected plans for restructuring. Management decided to lay off workers while considering selling the production facilities to Titan International. The French government stepped in and said that French labor law requires that all workers must remain employed full time. Even those who work just a few hours must draw full-time paychecks. Titan International turned thumbs down on the purchase. Retaliating, the plant manager and the Director of Human Relations were kept from leaving the plant by union members (called boss-napping) but were rescued by police after several hours of confinement. France has a 35-hour workweek, six weeks of vacation and a 75% top marginal tax rate.
The approach to financial stability in government is quite different than in the private sector. It seems reasonable that the federal government as well as each of its subdivisions such as states, counties, cities, villages, townships, parishes and boroughs should balance spending with revenue. However, it is common for jurisdictions to issue bonds or borrow funds for infrastructure creation, maintenance and repair. When government employees spend money that is not their own, they tend to squander too much at the wrong time, in the wrong places and on the wrong projects. Money is often spent on themselves and with financial contributors, friends and relatives. When government over-spends, it is explained as necessary and taxes, tolls, fees, licenses, fines and tariffs are increased to offset the shortfall.
Much of the information in this article is based on facts while the preceding paragraph is based on empirical evidence e.g., information drawn from observation and/or experience. Logic leads us to believe something is wrong in our system of government. A nation founded on the integrity, honesty and self-determination of pioneers has declined into a culture of deception and corruption without accountability at all levels. Politicians turned government officials have become wealthy while the middle class isn’t doing too well and those on welfare are growing into a vast under-class of non-contributors. And we are all bogged down in unabridged uncertainty.
Is it possible that the system design and plan is ok, but is being activated and maintained by those who are oblivious to the Constitution and rule of law? Have we unwittingly exempted politicians turned government jobholders from observing ethical standards? Have we gone too far in offering entitlements? Are we emulating France and Greece regarding benefits and abusive work rules? Has truth telling become parody?
A solution to the following dilemma must be instituted: Persons and organizations that have the authority to establish their own compensation, benefits, job descriptions and performance rules will generally succumb to nefarious choices and not in the best interest of those they represent.
– Dick Baytnon
