hamburgman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 569
GoWyo said:hamburgman said:A family in this case would start cutting cost and getting rid of money losing entities. So goodbye New Mexico, Mississippi, Alabama
The federal government does not own these entities, so it couldn't divest itself of these money losers. However, it does own millions of acres of land which it spends a gazillion dollars mismanaging and then paying the legal fees of environmental groups who file lawsuits advocating no management and lockup from all human uses. Then there are programs like the Wild Horse and Burro Act, which wastes millions of dollars preserving "an American icon" that breeds as fast as alley cats (annual 20% herd population increase), contributes to mismanagement of government land, must be periodically removed, but can never be put to any economic use such as human or animal food. If the federal government divested itself of all property except National Parks, military installations and enumerated federal enclaves, it would save a lot of money and create a whole lot of economic activity under new ownership and management. As for states that suck money, change the laws and cut off the subsidies. Easy solution -- good luck on that. :
So government is supposed to act like a business but can't take business steps because they don't own the things they are responsible to? Agree on the American Icon thing, just a waste of resources so much of the time. I am in general not a fan of feral programs private or government. Feel like they are an economic luxury that diverts resources away from more useful places.