Is the government or private indiviaduals the best people to spend the nations money?
The government are taking more and more through taxation, but I don't always like how and what they spend it on.
2006-11-22 22:55:17 · 12 answers · asked by Barbara Doll to you 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
NO NO NO NO NO!! The government haven't got a clue when money is concerned. They've got so much of it themselves, they lose track of the value of it. It should be down to the 'Joe Bloggs' of the country, at least they know how far money stretches and what its like to have to scrimp by. Why does the government not do what us the public want? Then they would get voted back in time and time again?
2006-11-23 01:42:43 · answer #1 · answered by S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, the answer is probably yes. Don't get me wrong, I think the current U.S. government is incredibly inefficient. There was a news report that revealed the government loses billions of taxpayer money every year - they simply can't find where it went. Then the reporter interviewed corporate accountants who said that if their company ever did something like that, they'd get tossed in prison.
But if the alternative is to have private citizens handle our money, that poses a dangerous problem. You have only a few people deciding where a lot of money goes. You also have fewer checks and balances to make sure the money is being spent in the right places.
I think something between the two would work best. A smaller government with fewer officials and their silly pet projects. That would mean fewer people to fight over money that should go to specific, necessary programs.
2006-11-23 07:21:29 · answer #2 · answered by anonymous 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes they ARE the best people - at least they take it from us in ways that most people recognise as being "fair", or at least reasonable or justifiable in some very broad sense. Universal subscription is by far the cheapest and best way to provide services to a whole nation.
If you don't agree, compare the BBC (cost: £131 per year or so for BBC1-4, 2 kids channels, news/parliament, plus radios 1-7 etc) with Sky (cost: £180 per year for the cheapest, very limited "mix package", which excludes sports & movies, and ALSO carries adverts - and up to over £500 for the full monty!). or compare the cost of water before privatisation to the vastly more expensive cost now.
However, government is very bad at running competitive businesses (British Steel, Rover) and entertainment projects (Millennium Dome, Olympics). And this government in particular seems to be able to make a horlicks of spending on everything from the NHS to its own election campaigns, so I'm not sure what I WOULD trust them with.
2006-11-23 07:11:49 · answer #3 · answered by gvih2g2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a very old question.
However there is no doubt that the best way for resources (money) to be spent, is in the hands of the people who earned it in the first place.
Governments, especially left leaning socialist governments can not or will not recognise this simple fact.
The belive that they know best how to spend the wealth that you have generated. In the meantime they generate zero wealth.
2006-11-23 08:18:54 · answer #4 · answered by George 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is the system we have, but it should have much more scrutiny from professionals "not Quangos" and in the event of negligence, incompetence or corruption the politicians involved should be dismissed and face prosecution.
It is simple to have fixed price contracts as standard.
The law should be changed to allow "no pardon" from prosecution after holding office for events that occurred during holding office.
To many politicians leave office very wealthy people whereas they entered office as average income people.
"Pigs at the trough"
2006-11-23 07:07:48 · answer #5 · answered by ian d 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The smaller we make government the better. The private sector is a much more efficient way to do almost everything. much less red tape and bureaucracy.
2006-11-23 06:59:10 · answer #6 · answered by mikeb721 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
of course not, anyone with aspirations to be a politician should automatically be barred from begoming one.
the problem we have is the stupid electoral system but without it we just have anarchy! (actually not a bad idea!)
POWER TO THE PEOPLE
2006-11-23 10:18:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they no track record of getting the best from it
2006-11-23 06:57:19 · answer #8 · answered by philipscottbrooks 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes they are, that is their job, but saying that I think that we should also have a say on where our money is spent.
2006-11-23 08:12:16 · answer #9 · answered by Waky 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course the Goverment are the best people, they are voted in after all. And if we left it to woman they would just buy shoes!
2006-11-23 06:56:56 · answer #10 · answered by brian h 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋