I completely agree.
Some corollaries are:
(1) There is no such thing as a self-made man.
(2) "Private property" always has a large admixture
of public contribution both to its formation and
its preservation.
Who pays calls the tune.
In the world of Bush, that tune is: The government will
support you doing whatever the hell you want as long as you
are "one of us".
An alternative would be my idea of property as stewardship
and accountability for what you do with it.
I think Harry's idea of BONDED private providers of public services
would be a good step forward.
Bonding and full cost accounting. Accountants as
stewards of the whole economy, making sure every "private
enterprise" pays its costs against the commons and that
all subsidies are -- as you say -- transparently
stated on the books.
The more complex our world becomes, the greater our
need for [bonded!] accountants and actuaries, to
make The Invisible Hand safe for humanity.
But back to 911, for a moment. When a congressman asked
George Tenet if anyoine had been held accountable for the
intelligence failures that allowed 911 to happen,
Tenet responded that no person had been censured or
fired. In other words, if you f-ck up badly enough
it's so "unthinkable" that nobody can be held
accountable for it, in part because, as
Condeleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzza
Rice explained, nobody could have imagined people using
jet planes as bombs -- even though we now have CIA
email from before 911 which expressed concern that exactly that
was going to happen. I think Ms. Rice should resign, thus
setting an example for others in the Bush who are incapable
of understanding the situation administration
to follow. Let's see if Cheney can turn a profit on
"regime change" in Iraq --
on the basis of fully transparent accountancy ( the newest
low-cost smart
bombs are $25,000 each, and casualties should be
charged against the project at their lost earnings +,
for those who do not die instantly, their medical
expenses).
\brad mccormick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The article says that business exists in a web of governmentally provided
> services and laws and government exists on tax dollars and (declining)
> respect for authority.
>
> Can't have one without the other----especially in our kind of society. So
> does business create profits? How great would those profits be without a
> sytem of contracts, law, sanitation, water, etc. etc.
>
> So Keith, you say,
>
> "It is, of course, the profits of business that enable government to exist
> at all."
>
> And I say, it is equally correct to say that business would not exist
> without the web of sevices and laws provided by government.
>
> No need to construct a series of accounts. Only need to give up seeing
> government as the other, and to give up seeing business as the other. Once
> again a question of balance.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Hudson [mailto:khudson@;handlo.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 1:07 AM
> To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: ACCOUNTING FOR PUBLIC SERVICES
>
> Arthur,
>
> Ah! In posting the following article, do I take it that you are now coming
> round to my idea, expressed several times on FW, that all bodies that have
> to do with the public should post transparent accounts? (In fact, I say
> that all communicated information within and between such bodies should be
> recorded and lodged in the public record so that it can be investigated and
> more widely publicised by anybody who wishes to.)
>
> Marylaine Block's idea is, as she says, a pipe dream, but it is not a good
> one because it is totally unrealistic. The plethora of accounts that she
> proposes would need building a model of the world almost as detailed as the
> world itself! It would need such an extension to the civil service and the
> non-productive part of business that it would drain the profit-making side
> of business of all its personnel.
>
> It is, of course, the profits of business that enable government to exist
> at all.
>
> Keith
>
> At 15:48 17/10/02 -0400, you wrote:
> <<<<
> ACCOUNTING FOR PUBLIC SERVICES
> by Marylaine Block
> A few weeks ago I wrote about GASB 34, the new accounting standard for
> public agencies. I thought it was entirely reasonable that since we are
> spending the public's money, we should be asked to give a businesslike
> account of how we use it. In fact, I thought we should start making a point
> of discussing the return we deliver on public investment.
>
> But turnabout is fair play. We live in an era where disdain and even
> mockery of government, its employees, and the services they provide, are
> prevalent. When this attitude is widespread, it can hardly help increasing
> the likelihood that profit-maximizing companies will see tax-avoidance as
> the most rational strategy.
>
> And that would be a pity, not just because it increases the tax burden on
> the rest of us, and not just because it could cut into the government
> services we receive as individuals. It would be counterproductive for
> business as well, because diminished tax revenues make it more difficult
> for governments to provide essential services business relies on.
>
> So let me tell you about a pipe dream I have. I'd like to see businesses
> use accounting standards that acknowledge all the public services they make
> use of every day. I'd like to force them to realize that they are as
> dependent on government subsidies as any bureaucrat or welfare recipient.
>
> I would like to see business executives acknowledge the tax dollars spent
> to bring water and sewer services out to new plants and office complexes
> they've built in the middle of nowhere. It would also be nice if they'd
> acknowledge the money spent by local and regional governments to provide
> them with police, fire and ambulance services, and the roads that bring
> their employees to work and their supplies to their factories and offices.
>
> I'd like them to acknowledge the subsidy our tax dollars provide them in
> the form of highways, ports, inland waterways, airports, and air traffic
> control, as well as in the form of the government-created internet which
> allows them to do some business without ever leaving home. I'd like
> executives in western states to acknowledge that without tax-funded dams
> and reservoirs that provide water, the cities and businesses they've built
> in the desert could not survive.
>
> I'd like to see them admit that the public picks up the tab to clean up the
> messes some businesses have created and walked away from, environmental
> damage caused by hazardous wastes, toxic spills, and effluent discharges
> into local waterways. I want them to acknowledge the resources they've
> extracted from public land that belongs to all of us and to generations
> that haven't been born yet, and the damage done in the process.
>
> I'd like to see businesses acknowledge the value of a workforce educated
> primarily in public schools, universities, and in some cases, community
> colleges that have tailored job-related training to the specific needs of
> area businesses. I'd like to see businesses account for their use of
> research funded by government agencies like the National Institutes of
> Health and the National Science Foundation, or funded by public
> universities -- especially when businesses like drug companies sell
> products based on that tax-funded research back to the public at hugely
> inflated prices. I'd like to see them acknowledge the value of the
> libraries that purchase, preserve, and organize that research, and then
> supply it on demand when businesses need it.
>
> I'd like to see executives acknowledge the extent to which they rely on
> government-collected data: census data, economic statistics, databases,
> maps, climate information, and financial data. I'd like to see them account
> for their use of the legal system which enforces compliance with their
> contracts, adjudicates their disputes, and awards and protects their
> patents and copyrights (if anything, too zealously). I want them to account
> for their use of our consulates and embassies and government agencies that
> protect and promote their business abroad.
>
> You see, if business executives had to use this kind of accounting system,
> they might be forced to realize that, no matter how great their ideas and
> achievements, they didn't do it alone. They drew on the long legacy of
> shared public resources -- a legacy we are all obligated to replenish. They
> might even come to understand the value of paying their fair share.
>
> A pipe dream, like I said. But a good one, don't you think?
> >>>>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
> Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ________________________________________________________________________
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
