Subject Areas


National Prosperity

Everyone must contribute, not just share

How to turn a profit for America

America is indeed financial distress, and if we don't find a solution for our problem, it could soon turn into a disaster. Nowhere on our political horizon is there any sign of real solutions for this problem. What I would like to do, is to make a suggestion as to how we can make America profitable again.

Unfortunately for our country, we can't do, like individuals do and take advantage of the television commercials to solve our tax problems with IRS, to save us debt on our credit cards or to plead our case with the rest of the world. We have to do something ourselves to correct the situation. How did we get to be this way? It's really pretty simple; we let ourselves lose track of the fact that in order for us to succeed in the world, we must make a national profit.

What is a national profit? When the country undertakes activities that result in a greater standard of living, that is a profit. For us to be safe financially successful, we need to concentrate on being profitable at it in as many of our endeavors as possible. When individuals are able to produce more goods or services than they themselves need, that contributes to the national profitability. On the other hand, when individuals do not produce as much as they use, that's a net loss.

The government is not a profit making enterprise. At best, is not hugely unprofitable. Most of the government operations are made at a loss. To cover for this loss. The private sector, meaning all working people, must make up the difference. So the bigger the government is the bigger the profit in the private sector needs to be. Or, conversely, the less profit in the private sector the smaller the government needs to be. The primary concern of the government is far as profit goes, should be to allow the greatest freedom to the private sector to learn sufficient wealth to pay for the government.

To meet the demands from political sector, the government is often encouraged to engage in operations that resulted in large losses. A classic case is that of ethanol. Nothing associated with ethanol is a productive that is profit-making for the nation. Ethanol cost more than gasoline is more polluting than gasoline, provides less miles per gallon than gasoline, causes increases in the cost of food, and misleads the public into thinking that we are helping the environment. In other words, there is no profit the nation to produce ethanol. If, ethanol were actually providing for all material that we needed in this country, it would be an entirely different situation, but as it is. It's a complete loss to the nation. The same criteria probably apply to all other farm supports as well.

Government intervention in the production of goods (agricultural or otherwise) will not prevent other countries from producing or manufacturing products less expensively than in the United States. The solution is to concentrate on things that we can do as well or better than anyone else. Giving financial supports to production in the country simply distorts the economic picture and hides the fact that we are losing money on the production. How can we possibly determine what is the best thing to do to maintain our financial independence if we don't know what it actually cost to produce our goods? In other words, government interference is almost always a bad idea.

The government inevitably functions as a means of redistributing value from those who create it, and those who need our support. However, our existing governmental structure has detoured into "spreading the wealth" to beyond the point of what the value learners can create. So the basic fact is that the government must decrease its policies of giving away value to projects and people where that need is not obvious.