If I get one consistent impression of our current politicians in Washington is they have no concept of "Profit and Loss". Having been and independent business owner for 30+ years, this was a concept that had to be embraced to survive and be successful. Politicians view their business philosophy as "Profit and prevent loss by Printing Money". Personally my preference would be to elect politicians that have not been brainwashed politically, but ones that comes from the private sector. Please don't tell me that this "type" of candidate will not any political experience in Foreign affairs, the Economy, Defense, Energy, etc. etc. Look at the supposed experience our Congress and Presidents have had in recent decades. Where did that get us now. How about we find candidates that are non-political, and loaded with COMMON SENSE, so we can get back to running our Country with a successful business mentality, not a corrupt political one. Just an observation.

Originally Posted by Guest

If I get one consistent impression of our current politicians in Washington is they have no concept of "Profit and Loss". Having been and independent business owner for 30+ years, this was a concept that had to be embraced to survive and be successful. Politicians view their business philosophy as "Profit and prevent loss by Printing Money". Personally my preference would be to elect politicians that have not been brainwashed politically, but ones that comes from the private sector. Please don't tell me that this "type" of candidate will not any political experience in Foreign affairs, the Economy, Defense, Energy, etc. etc. Look at the supposed experience our Congress and Presidents have had in recent decades. Where did that get us now. How about we find candidates that are non-political, and loaded with COMMON SENSE, so we can get back to running our Country with a successful business mentality, not a corrupt political one. Just an observation.

It would be impossible to apply the traditional profit and loss mindset from business to any government.

Too many funded programs that last forever or for years. Having to turn a profit in any one period would stop the government dead in its tracks and all services that we rely on would simply cease.

For example I think I read the US Postal system lost 754 Million in just the first quarter of this year.

Two different things private business and government

If any of the non-political candidates (Farina, Carson, or Trump) would actually get elected, they would be steamrolled by all the politicians in Washington. Trump could blather all he wanted to do, but Congress would laugh at his blowhard mouth rantings and give him no respect.

Farina would be treated nicer because she is a nice lady. However, she would also find she would have to bow to the political wishes or get nothing done.

Carson - same story as for Farina. Nice guy but would be useless unless he kowtowed to Congressional pressure.

In my opinion both of the posts above are select opinions, however I disagree with both.
I myself am not ready to surrender to politics as usual is the only way to conduct business.

It is no different than going in to turn around any company that is losing money with no improvement in results for far too long.

Bring in a hard nosed rescue individual or companyand the first thing they do is put in charge one of their own.......as CEO or President or what ever the top position controlling the business entity.

Parallel analysis will be done of all the "executives" as well as the balance sheet and the income statement.

There is usually no improvement until such time as the dead wood or those who are not capable or those who are in the wrong jobs or those who are executives because they are one of the good old boys or a relative or some other you owe me position.

These people will need to be removed and replaced with known competent folks who are dedicated business performers prepared to do what it takes to define the ills that are generating the losses.

Then there are plans defined who does what when and how much. The usual first causes after the executive team has been replaced is to stop hemhoraging.......remove or stop what ever it is that is causing the excess expenses. At the same time the usual problem on the balance sheet is cash. Lack of it....no controls of it.....put inplace extreme control of cash expenditures.

There is a lot more but the bleeding....use of cash....too high expenses....spending more than the revenues will support....etc....etc....etc.

These same simple to do but difficult to implement elements will work to fix any entity....even the government.

It starts with getting rid of the incapable executivand put in replacements that do not know why things have to stay the way they are........elect the right person.....definitely should not be a politician.

Cut the spending that does not directly affect the essential expenses to run and protect the country and care for we the people.

One very good example? The Susan B. Anthony dollar coins. A completely unsuccessful program that just did not work. So the circulation was discontinued. Billions of dollars of these coins put in storeage costing millions of dollars to do so. AND because there was a 10 or more contract issued, they continued to mint the coin to honor the contract. They ran out of warehouse space and millions more had to be spent to create more warehouse space.

Non of which makes sense. But the politis rule. Obviously the mints are in some congress members states.....they aren't going to shut it down....get rid of the work force....get rid of the storeage costs.....upset the people who work there....the special interest and lobbyists who will raise holy hell about their interests......and on and on hence nothing gets done to stop the bleeding!

Profit and loss statements and balance sheets and what makes them tick is no mystery to the right, RESPONSIBLE, people.

Just like fixing a troubeled company there has to be changes made....people will lose jobs.....spending will have to stop......a zero based budget to bring spending in line with revenues.....no more spending beyond the revenue stream.

Yes it can be done in Washington.
No it cannot be done by the incumbents.
No it will not get done as long as people like the two posts above think the rules of profit and loss either do not or cannot apply to the government. It is just not true.

ONLY the right people who know how to do it can make it happen. They are not currently in office.

For those who do not have an intimate and I do mean intimate understanding how income statements and balance sheets work.....they will not know what needs to be done either. And NONE including the incumbents will do the painful fixes required.

And we the people are conditioneto the incapable, incompetentance in Washington.

Government has been out of control for so long and for so many reasons that to expect that it can be saved by itself is whistling in the wind.

Croynism, fraud abuse to get vote grants credits ..free stuff is addictive. Government incompetence abounds. To wit: medicare earned credit income that is misapplied in beter than 24% of the cases and government employees know it and think of it as income redistribution.

The political class have come to believe that they are the privilege class and that's a serious problem. Do you see them on Obamacare?

There is a movement brewing for a Constitutional Convention. To succeed its has to be ratified by 34 states. As of now there seems to be little hope that it can get done. The last Constitutional Convention was held in Washington's time As i recollect it was 1787 thereabouts ?

Is it worthwhile? Perhaps its a good topic for discussion on Political Talk?

However to address the OP's question short of a Constitutional Convention
there is little reason to believe the political class will change their ways because Washington offers too many temptations and they are blessed with taypayer money and we know they are good at finding reasons to raise more taxes and find ways to grant favors to those who matter to their future campaigns corporations unions

Personal Best Regards:
A Constitutional Convention will seek a federal balanced budget, term limits for Congress and the Supreme Court.

I don't see how profit and loss would pertain to running the gov. The gov does not produce a product. It is entirely service oriented. The only way they could make a profit is if they charged (taxed) more than they spent, and we know that will never happen. No president has paid down on the national debt since Eisenhower. That's a long time. Politicians have no concept of running a business. How long has it been since a politician went to D.C. and didn't leave a rich man/woman? The only business they understand is how much money they can make, and to heck with the country. They get elected or re-elected purely on how well they can convince the voter that they really do care for them. Spending tax revenues means nothing to them, even when they are borrowing more from China, Japan, etc. Big spenders with others' money. But, as long as there are those that want a hand out, instead of working we will always have that problem. Politicians don't care, period. It's not coming from their pocket. And the more they spend the more they make. They don't even think they need a budget anymore. Why should they? They always go over budget every year that they do have one. Obama bragged about "reducing the deficit." Like that is a major accomplishment. That means that he reduced the amount of over spending. He couldn't say that they balanced the budget. That would be lying.

This is a tiring argument. We don't need another lawyer, doctor or career politician in the White House. We need a mathematician. We need someone in there that realizes that he/she will only get one term, because they are going to make so many enemies. One that will say no to frivolous spending and hand outs. One that will tell those seeking grants or foreign aid, etc. that they can't have any more money until we are under budget and can afford it again. Everyone needs to start paying taxes again, not just the middle class and rich. That way everyone will have a stake in the process. That way we can start electing politicians that can't promise pie in the sky like the socialists get away with when running for election. Take the spending ability away from the politician. No more bills with funding for individual pet projects hidden in them. In order to spend money we should at least make it a 70-80% voting majority, not a simple majority. I don't know because I am not good at profit making. But, I do know that we can't keep borrowing and spending like there is no tomorrow. Liberals claim conservatives don't care about the poor, the children, the sick, the starving or the old, because we are trying to find a way to stop the revenue bleeding. But, defense is only a small portion of the cost and can't be cut any more. I am not sure of the percentage of the yearly budget is spent on Entitlements, but I think it is something like 70-80% of the total. If that is true, then we are in real trouble. We can not sustain that kind of spending. In order to continue this kind of spending, we would/will have to cut important expenses.
Clinton is running her mouth about paying more money out for college. Millions more down the drain. Look at how many idiots are flocking to Sanders, the socialist because they believe he is going to give them more than even the Dems can promise. And the Dems promise a lot. America is acting like a bunch of spoiled children, with their hands out and not willing to work for it.

Originally Posted by Guest

In my opinion both of the posts above are select opinions, however I disagree with both.
I myself am not ready to surrender to politics as usual is the only way to conduct business.

It is no different than going in to turn around any company that is losing money with no improvement in results for far too long.

Bring in a hard nosed rescue individual or companyand the first thing they do is put in charge one of their own.......as CEO or President or what ever the top position controlling the business entity.

Parallel analysis will be done of all the "executives" as well as the balance sheet and the income statement.


There is usually no improvement until such time as the dead wood or those who are not capable or those who are in the wrong jobs or those who are executives because they are one of the good old boys or a relative or some other you owe me position.

These people will need to be removed and replaced with known competent folks who are dedicated business performers prepared to do what it takes to define the ills that are generating the losses.

Then there are plans defined who does what when and how much. The usual first causes after the executive team has been replaced is to stop hemhoraging.......remove or stop what ever it is that is causing the excess expenses. At the same time the usual problem on the balance sheet is cash. Lack of it....no controls of it.....put inplace extreme control of cash expenditures.

There is a lot more but the bleeding....use of cash....too high expenses....spending more than the revenues will support....etc....etc....etc.

These same simple to do but difficult to implement elements will work to fix any entity....even the government.

It starts with getting rid of the incapable executivand put in replacements that do not know why things have to stay the way they are........elect the right person.....definitely should not be a politician.

Cut the spending that does not directly affect the essential expenses to run and protect the country and care for we the people.

One very good example? The Susan B. Anthony dollar coins. A completely unsuccessful program that just did not work. So the circulation was discontinued. Billions of dollars of these coins put in storeage costing millions of dollars to do so. AND because there was a 10 or more contract issued, they continued to mint the coin to honor the contract. They ran out of warehouse space and millions more had to be spent to create more warehouse space.

Non of which makes sense. But the politis rule. Obviously the mints are in some congress members states.....they aren't going to shut it down....get rid of the work force....get rid of the storeage costs.....upset the people who work there....the special interest and lobbyists who will raise holy hell about their interests......and on and on hence nothing gets done to stop the bleeding!

Profit and loss statements and balance sheets and what makes them tick is no mystery to the right, RESPONSIBLE, people.

Just like fixing a troubeled company there has to be changes made....people will lose jobs.....spending will have to stop......a zero based budget to bring spending in line with revenues.....no more spending beyond the revenue stream.

Yes it can be done in Washington.
No it cannot be done by the incumbents.
No it will not get done as long as people like the two posts above think the rules of profit and loss either do not or cannot apply to the government. It is just not true.

ONLY the right people who know how to do it can make it happen. They are not currently in office.

For those who do not have an intimate and I do mean intimate understanding how income statements and balance sheets work.....they will not know what needs to be done either. And NONE including the incumbents will do the painful fixes required.

And we the people are conditioneto the incapable, incompetentance in Washington.

There are too many voters whom financially depend on the status quo to vote in any polititian that will make those tough decisions you speak to. To zero base any budget there would be a large number of losers, no change until we hit the wall and then it will be too late.

Originally Posted by Guest

If any of the non-political candidates (Farina, Carson, or Trump) would actually get elected, they would be steamrolled by all the politicians in Washington. Trump could blather all he wanted to do, but Congress would laugh at his blowhard mouth rantings and give him no respect.

Farina would be treated nicer because she is a nice lady. However, she would also find she would have to bow to the political wishes or get nothing done.

Carson - same story as for Farina. Nice guy but would be useless unless he kowtowed to Congressional pressure.

Only WE can vote those career politicians out of office. They are the #1 problem, they want all of the money they can get. I will always wonder how the US would be IF Romney had been elected.

I do not accept the notion that profit and loss apply to the government because they do not produce a product, etc.

How many households in America produce a product?
It would be fair to say almost none (Isaid ALMOST!)......or most do not. However they are confronted with the same actions to balance a budget and not spend more than comes in (call it anything you want....it is whatever income/revenues/sources of cash/etc.

We are all subject to the same rules of accounting whether a household, small business, fortune 500 company or government(s)........none can spend more than there is coming in to cover the bills.

It is just that simple.

I have said this before and I will continue to say it until some that don't get it start to see why....

If you were spending more money at your home each month than you have coming in at some point you would have to do something as the laws of accounting as well as the laws of the land will not allow one to keep spending what they do not have.

However, what if you had the same ability as the federal government to spend as much as you want

........ not have to worry about paying it back

......or how large the amount owed grows to be

.....and you are allowed to borrow what you need to make the payments

.......and there is no limit on how much you could borrow.

.......and if somebody gets a little upset they might threaten to shut you down but as usual for and excuse or two you will get even more money and continue as you have been spending


OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!

So do not delude yourself that the same rules of balanced budgeting do not apply to the government....it could (COULD!) suggest one does not understand basic finances.

I have copied/lifteda sentence from Personal Best Regards post and feel obilgated to repeat it as it is so profound and accurate:


The political class have come to believe that they are the privilege class and that's a serious problem. Do you see them on Obamacare?

Originally Posted by Guest

Only WE can vote those career politicians out of office. They are the #1 problem, they want all of the money they can get. I will always wonder how the US would be IF Romney had been elected.

And, as we vote these career politicians out of office they just move there offices to K street and become lobbyists so, the circle remains unbroken!

Nonsense. What the OP clearly meant was balancing the budget. This has been done in the past, most recently when Clinton was in office. I am not a big Clinton fan but he and Gingrich got it done. While I agree that the government and business are fundamentally different, there is no reason that large deficits have to exist year after year after year. Occasional deficits are inevitable because of recessions that impact how much taxes the government collects and much of the spending cannot be reduced when that happens, but the perpetual overspending is inexcusable. You sound like a democrat.

Originally Posted by Guest

It would be impossible to apply the traditional profit and loss mindset from business to any government.

Too many funded programs that last forever or for years. Having to turn a profit in any one period would stop the government dead in its tracks and all services that we rely on would simply cease.

For example I think I read the US Postal system lost 754 Million in just the first quarter of this year.

Two different things private business and government

It is "Fiorina" - learn how to spell. This sad attempt at humor reflects badly on you.

Originally Posted by Guest

If any of the non-political candidates (Farina, Carson, or Trump) would actually get elected, they would be steamrolled by all the politicians in Washington. Trump could blather all he wanted to do, but Congress would laugh at his blowhard mouth rantings and give him no respect.

Farina would be treated nicer because she is a nice lady. However, she would also find she would have to bow to the political wishes or get nothing done.

Carson - same story as for Farina. Nice guy but would be useless unless he kowtowed to Congressional pressure.

Originally Posted by Guest

It is "Fiorina" - learn how to spell. This sad attempt at humor reflects badly on you.

I never understood how these people, and it is just a few, who have a need deep inside them somewhere to mock people and make fun of their names.

Honestly, until this political forum, the last time I heard that kind of attempted humor and ridicule was in maybe 5th grade.

So why can't the government be run like a business? Of course they have a product to sell...they are collecting taxes on it in record numbers!

There is a Definite lack of how income statements and balance sheets function and what it takes to make a balanced budget and positive income statement happen?