Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The president doesn't have to negotiate arms deals with other entities, that's actually handled by the department of defense. The president only has to determine whether or not the pentagon is allowed to sell those arms to that country. The president is far too high level to sit in meetings and determine how many arms or at what price. There is no negotiations being had.
Writing off assets for depreciation is not making any change to the revenue the company posts. That's not at all the same thing. Depreciation is used to recuperate upfront costs you pay for an asset over time. That tax write off would not show up in revenues. Product losses are also a write off, not the same as a revenue.
Being able to control your own currency is exactly the point we are discussing. You claim the government is like a business and one of the major reasons it isn't is because it controls it's own currency. How is that missing the point? A business cannot print more money when it needs it to invest in things. The government is able to fund it's own expansion projects without the need of investors or banks, that's huge! I don't know how that would be missing the point.
The only thing business acumen can benefit the president is in their soft skills. Stuff like the ability to present in front of large groups and be a likeable personality.
Let me break down this last part:
Both US Gov't and businesses are taxing authorities. - Businesses do not tax anyone. Have you ever been taxed by a business?
Both US Gov't and businesses have employees. This is true!
Both US Gov't and businesses have " P & L" statements. Not true. The US Government does not turn a profit, that's on purpose actually. The government has revenues and expenses like a business. However, as I mentioned before they do not need to turn a profit because they control their own currency. Governments are better off operating at a loss because it means they are injecting currency into the economy. If a government did truly make a profit it would actually shrink the available money supply and cause deflation. So governments CHOOSE to operate at a loss and grow the deficit to keep a slight inflation. That's the sweet spot in economics.
Both US Gov't and business have competition. I can see what you're saying here but it's not the same. Sure, we need to compete globally for exports and imports but governments don't need to "compete". Tax revenue is guaranteed regardless so it's not like government could go bankrupt if they don't compete.
Both US Gov't and businesses have a "President" that is ultimately responsible for the "health" of that entity. A president has a term limit whereas a CEO or president of a company wouldn't. Thats a significant difference when you consider that 4 years isn't a very long time to get much done. Also the motivations for the two are totally different. The president needs to satisfy their constituents and lobbyists (policy focused) whereas a CEO would need to satisfy it's board and stockholders (primarily money driven).
Think of a "board of directors" as cabinet positions. I disagree. I would think the C suite would be the cabinet positions as they directly support the president in his duties. If anything the presidential "board of directors" would be their constituents or those who they made promises to when running for office. It's the presidents job to carry out their vision of what the country should be.
Ok ,you win. I can only lead you to water, I can't make you drink. Picking it apart doesn't change 1 fact. Have a great day.
The president doesn't have to negotiate arms deals with other entities, that's actually handled by the department of defense. The president only has to determine whether or not the pentagon is allowed to sell those arms to that country. The president is far too high level to sit in meetings and determine how many arms or at what price. There is no negotiations being had.
So much wrong here; The President must approve all foreign sales and as the head of the executive department, directly manages the State and Defense departments that actually implement these sales - he is integral to the process. The DoD does not "negotiate" arms deals - it is the State Department that negotiates these deals between the governments and issues the LOA. The DoD primarily manages the sales after it is negotiated and approved. From https://www.dsca.mil/foreign-military-sales-fms
Quote:
The Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program is a form of security assistance authorized by the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), as amended [22 U.S.C. 2751, et. seq.] and a fundamental tool of U.S. foreign policy.
Under Section 3, of the AECA, the U.S. may sell defense articles and services to foreign countries and international organizations when the President formally finds that to do so will strengthen the security of the U.S. and promote world peace.
Under FMS, the U.S. Government and a foreign government enter into a government-to-government agreement called a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA).
WHO: (The) Secretary of State determines which countries will have programs. Secretary of Defense executes the program.
Writing off assets for depreciation is not making any change to the revenue the company posts. That's not at all the same thing. Depreciation is used to recuperate upfront costs you pay for an asset over time. That tax write off would not show up in revenues. Product losses are also a write off, not the same as a revenue.
Depreciating assets directly impacts profits and revenue - it allows a company to reduce taxable income in the years after the asset purchase which reduces taxes paid and increases revenue and profits. From investopedia
Quote:
Depreciation represents how much of an asset's value has been used. It allows companies to earn revenue from the assets they own by paying for them over a certain period of time.
Because companies don't have to account for them entirely in the year the assets are purchased, the immediate cost of ownership is significantly reduced. Not accounting for depreciation can greatly affect a company's profits
Businesses do pass taxes that are paid to employees (through reduced salaries and benefits) and consumers (higher cost of product) and owners (lower profits) so any taxes saved do impact everyone involved and impact overall revenue.
People still on this thread trying to defend Joe Biden's lying? Pathetic.
And the latest, Joe said that while gas now averages $3-someting per gallon, it was over $5 when he took office. Even left-wing CNN called him out on that lie. The average gas price was $2.31 nationally when he took office.
“It was over $5 when he took office” and “The average gas price was $2.31 nationally when he took office”. Makes no sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
