There is a fatal flaw in the idea of electing a successful business executive to be President and run the government. This idea is based on the theory that experience in successfully running a large, complex business organization will be useful experience when it comes to running the government. To a certain extent, this is true. But the fatal flaw in this reasoning is the fact that the government is not a business. The goals and the measures of success are very different for government than for a business. The overriding goal, and the measure of success, for a business is making a profit, unless we are talking about a non-profit business, such as a charitable organization.
In a for-profit business, the goal is to enrich those running the business and the owners of the business, the stock owners in most cases. This is done by having as many customers as possible spend as much money as possible on the business’s products and services. And yes, the best way to do this is to satisfy the needs of the customers, but it can also be done through fraud and things like predatory lending.
With the government, the customers are the people, and the people should also be the owners, but unfortunately, with the way our elections work, the real owners are the wealthy donors – these are the “stockholders” of the government. The bottom line is that running a huge complex organization for profit is not the same as running it for the sole purpose or enriching the lives of the customers – the people.
Still don’t see the difference? Think about this. A business would be perfectly happy having a few billionaires spending millions on their products, while 99% of the population goes without because they cannot afford the product. The government cannot and should not operate in this fashion. The “products” of the government need to be equally available and accessible to ALL the people. That is a completely different paradigm than that for a business.