Model Governments After Businesses

The private sector spends a dollar much more efficiently than the public sector. The government should be modeled after a business where there are incentives and competition.



  • Would be good for government employees to have to reach goals in order to earn their benefits. And it would be good for over-achievers to be well compensated in order to attract the smartest people to governments.

  • I object because competition has caused financial meltdowns and destruction of the environment.

  • They deregulated the banks in the US. It didn't work! They voted against it in Canada, hence the stronger economy.

  • I object because democracy should shape government. Democracy implies competition of ideas, basic rights, etc.

  • I object because incentivising politicians to run surpluses reduces economic policy to accountancy and is an ideologically charged right wing idea. For example, politicians cut spending on roads and schools, and get an automatic pay rise.

  • I object because it tends to fail repeatedly in practice.

  • at 0000000004.... regarding the application to government employees, that is a whole different question.

  • As in the incentive based model of the financial institutions that has crushed the global economy?? Plus the Gov't has they're own version of an incentive based 'business plan' as most are in collusion w/big business leaving the rest of us in their wake. Therein lies the problem w/your proposal: Corruption.

  • i believe if we at birth were nurtured to follow our passion we wouldn't really need incentive because you would be so happy to do what you love to do, i think incentive and competition only distract from that because then a lot of people take jobs they hate so they can have more things and stuff when they could already have that if they just did what they came here to do since we are all so different and unique it would work sybiotically and not be forced. thanks everyone much love<3

  • this is a truely brilliant idea but because were anti corperation right now it will get blasted. for example we have a huge rent a cop force policeing transit, but by simply making the trains free you releive the tax burden of rent a cops. unfortunatly words like security and safety are used and it directly afects our rights and freedoms, bla, bla, bla.

  • I strongly agree, there is so much money wasted in govement departments ,they function like businesses out of control. In the private sector they would not survive. They are not accountable!

  • I object because it is not ment to be in it for profit

  • Businesses are structured to make profit. Government is stuctured to meet the needs of all citizens. Those are very different priorities, and can be mutually exclusive.

  • I object because businesses are modeled for profit and to take. Businesses are not for the benefit of anyone but the person controlling that business. A government should focus on the people and giving, not itself and taking.

  • I object because A government should be about people not money.

  • I voted "Yes", but I´d like to point that this should be done very carefully, because it could harm the goals of public administration. It´s good to have incentives for better performance, but some kinds of incentives can be perverse. They could lead, for example, to bad competition between the public administration staff. They also could lead to the persecution of some goals, some numbers, in despite of more important goals. Here, in Brazil, some local governments have made "business style" administration goals and rewards linked to these goals, in the Education area, and it was a disaster. In fact, that kind of thing in the Education area was criticized by one of its pioneers (I forgot his name, but he is from US).

  • Just a fast hello and also to thank you for discussing your ideas on this page. I wound up in your blog right after reaisrcheng physical fitness connected issues on Yahoo… guess I lost track of what I had been performing! Anyway I’ll be back once once more inside the long term to test out your blogposts down the road. Thanks!

  • I object because the human species is a cooperative being, not a competitive being, (see Alphie Kohn's "No Contest" for an argument I defy you to unravel). Our government is already operating as a business and it's failing rapidly and miserably to meet the needs contained in the common weal. There are certainly thousands of better solutions than this to increase efficient use of resources by government.

  • When I said that our government is already run as business, I meant that it is already serving business interests over the common weal and that politics are run by businesses in the US.

  • I object because what you seem to be arguing for is a version of Oligarchical rule. It would be very difficult in that situation to focus on the needs of the people rather than the needs of the businesses and infrastructure that private companies focus on, because private companies are run for the benefit of shareholders firstly, and then are run to meet goals, which result in bonuses. A better version of government in this situation would be a 'Meritocratic' system, where the best qualified people are given the job. Therefore a Meritocracy is rule by the best qualified, who are picked on their merits rather than by popularity.

  • I object because there is no other way to provide negative feedback for the comment you have made about airbrushing models.


Similar Ideas: