Obama Administration Has Less Private Sector Experience than Any Other.

[Polk]

So they do it because they're selfless?

Some do. Some do because they're more interested in job security than a huge payday. The point is, they're not like these corporate raiders who will sometimes venture over to the public sector to help their pals make a big payday.

I think there's some truth to that, but it wasn't really what I was driving at. Your earlier post said...

Careers in government are going to bring in people who end up looking at all sides of the issue and balance the concerns. Bring in people from the private sector is going to result in the agencies issuing and overturning regulations, whichever is relevant toward the goal, to help out their corporate buddies.

My point was that not all people who work in the public sector do so purely because they want to spend their careers being visibly even handed. Everyone has an agenda, whether they admit to it or not, and having 20 years' public sector experience does not necessarily give one the ability to balance all the concerns.

The U.S. economy is, after all, built on capitalism, and the ability to balance the needs of business with the needs of society in general is a difficult talent to acquire.

That said, relying purely on the private sector for advice is dangerous as well. There are undoubtedly those who, after 20 years in one corporation or another, take a role in government and have sympathy for the views and needs of their former business partners. Indeed they may still have a financial interest in their former companies, whether that interest is evident (stock holding or stock options) or not. Does that make them any different from, say, a politician who feels pressure to grant a favor or two to the individuals or lobbyists to helped get him elected in the first place? I'd argue not.

In short, my concern is that writing off all private sector experience (as you appear to be doing - feel free to correct me if I'm misconstruing) because one has concerns about payback is as narrow a view as endorsing all public sector advisors as well-balanced, even-handed and competent to propose policy in isolation across the entire economic and political landscape.

If you make decisions about who to hire based solely on stereotypes then you shouldn't be running a lemonade stand, much less a government. Is Obama doing it that way? Who knows. But your comment about "Bring in people from the private sector is going to result in the agencies issuing and overturning regulations, whichever is relevant toward the goal, to help out their corporate buddies" appears to indicate that you have some sympathy for that general angle on hiring policy.

It's early in the morning and I've fumbled this a bit, but I think my point is relatively clear, even if you don't agree with it.

You've made your argument clear. And of course I have a sympathy toward hiring from the public sector, because I don't think the Goldman Sachs Treasury Department and Energy Policy Presented by Shell is the best way to go. I'm not saying that only having public sector experience is going to result in good policy, because it can just as easily end up with kooks like Gale Norton running the Interior Department.

 

[Toro]

On the one hand, people who say that we should run government like a business seem to have little understanding of what government does or the purpose of government.

On the other hand, if you are dealing with solutions for the private market, the more private market experience one has, the better.

 

[rdean]

The Republican party has become the "party of the fools".

and if you blindly follow the other chumps your not a fool?.....want to see what a fool looks like rdean?.....look in your mirror....

Blindly follow? I'm not a Republican. I even know how to read and finger count.

 

[typicalLefty]

The reason Obama is so great is precisely because he hasn't been corrupted by the private sector, and he understands that simple economic theories do not explain the best way to govern the masses. The private sector is all about what people want (greed). The public sector is all about what people need (compassion).

 

[Claudette]

I don't think Ol'BO and he merry band have a clue about creating jobs. The only thing they seem to be good at is spreading the weath. Jobs is the foremost thing on most Americans minds yet BO is more concerned with healthcare, crap and trade, the green agenda and all the other social bs that steals money from those that earned it and gives it to those that didn't. CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN

 

[VaYank5150]

Actually, the title should say "Obama Administration Has Less Private Sector Experience than Any Other."

Does Obama Administration Have Less Business Experience?

OK, OK. I'll play. So?

 

[Foxfyre]

The reason Obama is so great is precisely because he hasn't been corrupted by the private sector, and he understands that simple economic theories do not explain the best way to govern the masses. The private sector is all about what people want (greed). The public sector is all about what people need (compassion).

Are you serious? He is great because he 'hasn't been corrupted by the private sector'? Do you honestly think there is less corruption in government than there is in the private sector? Do you truly believe those people in Washington have been representing the people and looking out for their best interests? That they have put the good of the American people ahead of their own self-serving interests? Do you honestly believe a politician that has been groomed and elevated by the Chicago machine is superior to one who has gotten his hands dirty doing honest work, who has hired and supervised people, who has had to manage a budget and an inventory and meet a payroll? Do you honestly believe that people who have never gotten their hands dirty doing honest work, who have never hired and supervised people, who have never had to manage a budget or an inventory or meet a payroll are more qualified to generate prosperity and growth than those who have been successful doing those things?

If you believe that, perhaps you can explain why you would believe it given the evidence spread out there before us all.

 

[Claudette]

Govern the masses??? What kind of bs talk is that??? God, you are off the deep end my friend. Business fuels the economy, not Govt. People don't need compassion. THey need jobs to pay their bills and put food on the table. You sound like your on the same lunch break that Ol'BO and his merry bad are on.

Lets see how long Govt survives without the private sector to provide the jobs that provide the money that runs the Govt and everything else. Not long my friend.

 

[VaYank5150]

Govern the masses??? What kind of bs talk is that??? God, you are off the deep end my friend. Business fuels the economy, not Govt. People don't need compassion. THey need jobs to pay their bills and put food on the table. You sound like your on the same lunch break that Ol'BO and his merry bad are on.

Lets see how long Govt survives without the private sector to provide the jobs that provide the money that runs the Govt and everything else. Not long my friend.

Ummmm....have you heard about TARP? Did you hear about the BILLIONS of dollars American BUSINESS had to borrow from our Federal Government to keep from going bankrupt? Please don't sing the praises of the private sector and damn the government, when it was the government to had to bail out said private sector.

 

[Big Fitz]

Actually, the title should say "Obama Administration Has Less Private Sector Experience than Any Other."

Does Obama Administration Have Less Business Experience?

OK, OK. I'll play. So?

Does the phrase "unqualified" ring any bells? Not only is P-BO unqualified, his advisers are unqualified, and his czars are unqualified. They have no idea how to fix the economy because they don't recognize what makes business work because they've never dealt with it. They only agitate, and sue, and petition, and protest, and talk, and loot, and steal, and preach, and teach, and none of them can do.

That is why it's important. Notice also, all but one of the bottom 5 are democrats, and the one Republican was a known progressive (TR). And only FDR and Wilson had a decent level of Private Sector cabinet members, and even they weren't in the top 5.

 

[Foxfyre]

Govern the masses??? What kind of bs talk is that??? God, you are off the deep end my friend. Business fuels the economy, not Govt. People don't need compassion. THey need jobs to pay their bills and put food on the table. You sound like your on the same lunch break that Ol'BO and his merry bad are on.

Lets see how long Govt survives without the private sector to provide the jobs that provide the money that runs the Govt and everything else. Not long my friend.

Ummmm....have you heard about TARP? Did you hear about the BILLIONS of dollars American BUSINESS had to borrow from our Federal Government to keep from going bankrupt? Please don't sing the praises of the private sector and damn the government, when it was the government to had to bail out said private sector.

Please show me some money, any money, that the Federal government has produced. Please show me a single dollar that government has spent, invested, provided, squandered, or loaned that a) was not taken from somebody else and/or b) that did not reduce the value of the earnings, savings, investments of the American people.

And then explain again how the government creates wealth and jobs.

 

[VaYank5150]

Actually, the title should say "Obama Administration Has Less Private Sector Experience than Any Other."

Does Obama Administration Have Less Business Experience?

OK, OK. I'll play. So?

Does the phrase "unqualified" ring any bells? Not only is P-BO unqualified, his advisers are unqualified, and his czars are unqualified. They have no idea how to fix the economy because they don't recognize what makes business work because they've never dealt with it. They only agitate, and sue, and petition, and protest, and talk, and loot, and steal, and preach, and teach, and none of them can do.

That is why it's important. Notice also, all but one of the bottom 5 are democrats, and the one Republican was a known progressive (TR). And only FDR and Wilson had a decent level of Private Sector cabinet members, and even they weren't in the top 5.

So, who do you give credit to when our economy was booming under Clinton? I am no fan of Clinton, mind you, just asking...

 

[Foxfyre]

So, for all you who are insisting that the best government comes from private sector experience...

...what is/was Palin's experience? What was all that 'executive experience' of hers about?

Just to be clear, some of us are insisting that the best government comes from having a good balance of experience, both public and private sector, and therefore a broader understanding of the ramifications of policy options.

Yes, yes, and YES! You take the most successful businessman in the world whose business did not require a degree of political savvy and/or who did not also serve as a public servant, and he might not be more competent than anybody else to serve in high office. But if you have somebody who has grown a business and met a payroll in real life PLUS having political savvy and some knowledge of how government policy and regulation gets done and what effect it has overall, plus communication and leadership skills, he or she is likely to be able to do a good job in government. Whether he or she will choose to do a good job or go the route of enhancing his/her own power, prestige, and personal wealth is another matter so integrity and character are also an important factor in the mix.

 

[VaYank5150]

Govern the masses??? What kind of bs talk is that??? God, you are off the deep end my friend. Business fuels the economy, not Govt. People don't need compassion. THey need jobs to pay their bills and put food on the table. You sound like your on the same lunch break that Ol'BO and his merry bad are on.

Lets see how long Govt survives without the private sector to provide the jobs that provide the money that runs the Govt and everything else. Not long my friend.

Ummmm....have you heard about TARP? Did you hear about the BILLIONS of dollars American BUSINESS had to borrow from our Federal Government to keep from going bankrupt? Please don't sing the praises of the private sector and damn the government, when it was the government to had to bail out said private sector.

Please show me some money, any money, that the Federal government has produced. Please show me a single dollar that government has spent, invested, provided, squandered, or loaned that a) was not taken from somebody else and/or b) that did not reduce the value of the earnings, savings, investments of the American people.

And then explain again how the government creates wealth and jobs.

I hate it when people answer my questions with more questions, but just for clarification purposes, please riddle me this: Are you saying that wealth and jobs would NOT have been lost had the Federal Government not loaned money to AIG, GM, Chrylser, BoA, etc?

 

[xsited1]

OK, OK. I'll play. So?

Does the phrase "unqualified" ring any bells? Not only is P-BO unqualified, his advisers are unqualified, and his czars are unqualified. They have no idea how to fix the economy because they don't recognize what makes business work because they've never dealt with it. They only agitate, and sue, and petition, and protest, and talk, and loot, and steal, and preach, and teach, and none of them can do.

That is why it's important. Notice also, all but one of the bottom 5 are democrats, and the one Republican was a known progressive (TR). And only FDR and Wilson had a decent level of Private Sector cabinet members, and even they weren't in the top 5.

So, who do you give credit to when our economy was booming under Clinton? I am no fan of Clinton, mind you, just asking...

You always give credit to the private sector. However, the government can and does have an effect on the economy. Since Congress controls spending, they are usually the ones to praise or criticize.

 

[typicalLefty]

The reason Obama is so great is precisely because he hasn't been corrupted by the private sector, and he understands that simple economic theories do not explain the best way to govern the masses. The private sector is all about what people want (greed). The public sector is all about what people need (compassion).

Are you serious? He is great because he 'hasn't been corrupted by the private sector'? Do you honestly think there is less corruption in government than there is in the private sector? Do you truly believe those people in Washington have been representing the people and looking out for their best interests? That they have put the good of the American people ahead of their own self-serving interests? Do you honestly believe a politician that has been groomed and elevated by the Chicago machine is superior to one who has gotten his hands dirty doing honest work, who has hired and supervised people, who has had to manage a budget and an inventory and meet a payroll? Do you honestly believe that people who have never gotten their hands dirty doing honest work, who have never hired and supervised people, who have never had to manage a budget or an inventory or meet a payroll are more qualified to generate prosperity and growth than those who have been successful doing those things?

If you believe that, perhaps you can explain why you would believe it given the evidence spread out there before us all.

Its been at least 8 years since government was "looking out for our best interests". You might believe that working towards a bottom line preps one for governance, thats your choice. But government does not work that way.

 

[Foxfyre]

OK, OK. I'll play. So?

Does the phrase "unqualified" ring any bells? Not only is P-BO unqualified, his advisers are unqualified, and his czars are unqualified. They have no idea how to fix the economy because they don't recognize what makes business work because they've never dealt with it. They only agitate, and sue, and petition, and protest, and talk, and loot, and steal, and preach, and teach, and none of them can do.

That is why it's important. Notice also, all but one of the bottom 5 are democrats, and the one Republican was a known progressive (TR). And only FDR and Wilson had a decent level of Private Sector cabinet members, and even they weren't in the top 5.

So, who do you give credit to when our economy was booming under Clinton? I am no fan of Clinton, mind you, just asking...

Clinton's first two years were mostly a disaster. Then a Republican majority in congress took over in 1994 and dragged him kicking and screaming but finally accepting a successful presidency. That freshman class of 1994 included 30-40 conservative Democrats too, and included a lot of idealists and visionaries and they were mostly business people, educators, scientists, medical professionals, etc. rather than mostly lawyers and career politicians. And they mostly had their heads on straight.

Clinton to his credit, once he saw how popular their policies and initiatives were, wanted to be loved more than anything else--Clinton was and is not a man of strong conviction about much of anything--and he chose to go along and did not throw up a lot of roadblocks to the process. The result was a great economy.

Unfortunately, once most of that Republican freshman class left Congress to go on to other things, the majority (Democrat and GOP) that was left gradually reverted to the old self-serving politics as usual with the result that we see today.

 

[VaYank5150]

Does the phrase "unqualified" ring any bells? Not only is P-BO unqualified, his advisers are unqualified, and his czars are unqualified. They have no idea how to fix the economy because they don't recognize what makes business work because they've never dealt with it. They only agitate, and sue, and petition, and protest, and talk, and loot, and steal, and preach, and teach, and none of them can do.

That is why it's important. Notice also, all but one of the bottom 5 are democrats, and the one Republican was a known progressive (TR). And only FDR and Wilson had a decent level of Private Sector cabinet members, and even they weren't in the top 5.

So, who do you give credit to when our economy was booming under Clinton? I am no fan of Clinton, mind you, just asking...

Clinton's first two years were mostly a disaster. Then a Republican majority in congress took over in 1994 and dragged him kicking and screaming but finally accepting a successful presidency. That freshman class of 1994 included 30-40 conservative Democrats too, and included a lot of idealists and visionaries and they were mostly business people, educators, scientists, medical professionals, etc. rather than mostly lawyers and career politicians. And they mostly had their heads on straight.

Clinton to his credit, once he saw how popular their policies and initiatives were, wanted to be loved more than anything else--Clinton was and is not a man of strong conviction about much of anything--and he chose to go along and did not throw up a lot of roadblocks to the process. The result was a great economy.

Unfortunately, once most of that Republican freshman class left Congress to go on to other things, the majority (Democrat and GOP) that was left gradually reverted to the old self-serving politics as usual with the result that we see today.

Thank you for the history lesson, however are you trying to say that the economy boomed simply because there was a Republilcan majority in Congress???? What legislation did this majority push through that helped the private sector be so successful?

 

[Foxfyre]

So, who do you give credit to when our economy was booming under Clinton? I am no fan of Clinton, mind you, just asking...

Clinton's first two years were mostly a disaster. Then a Republican majority in congress took over in 1994 and dragged him kicking and screaming but finally accepting a successful presidency. That freshman class of 1994 included 30-40 conservative Democrats too, and included a lot of idealists and visionaries and they were mostly business people, educators, scientists, medical professionals, etc. rather than mostly lawyers and career politicians. And they mostly had their heads on straight.

Clinton to his credit, once he saw how popular their policies and initiatives were, wanted to be loved more than anything else--Clinton was and is not a man of strong conviction about much of anything--and he chose to go along and did not throw up a lot of roadblocks to the process. The result was a great economy.

Unfortunately, once most of that Republican freshman class left Congress to go on to other things, the majority (Democrat and GOP) that was left gradually reverted to the old self-serving politics as usual with the result that we see today.

Thank you for the history lesson, however are you trying to say that the economy boomed simply because there was a Republilcan majority in Congress???? What legislation did this majority push through that helped the private sector be so successful?

Well for one thing they reformed the way Congress was doing business to make it more responsive and responsible. They kept their pledge to bring all the promises in the Contract with America to a vote in the first 100 days and passed all but term limits--came darn close to getting that through too. They got some key tax cuts passed and amended a lot of the tax code and regulatory process that was decidedly pro-business. And they pushed through welfare reform that forced millions of Americans to go back to work with a resulting boost to the economy. (Clinton vetoed that twice before he realized that public opinion was against him, and then he was all for it and of course took credit for it.)

Mostly, however, that Congress shifted a lot of government out of the way of business so that the private sector generated prosperity as only freedom allows and government cannot do.

 

[sealybobo]

So lets let a CEO run the country like Bush or Mitt Romney. Or Rudy, who's crooked as they come. Private sector private schmector.

Obama has a good head on his shoulders and he is an honest man. That's better than any GOP'er can offer.