STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
An Efficient President is the Last Thing the US Needs
By Daily Bell Staff - May 31, 2016

What the President Does … By  Jonathan Bernstein  Turns out maybe Donald Trump doesn’t want to be president after all. Oh, he wants to run for president. Almost certainly wants to win. Probably wants to be inaugurated. But doing the actual job? That’s something else. At least according to Paul Manafort, Trump’s strategist and campaign chairman, in an interview with HuffPost’s Howard Fineman. -Bloomberg

So Donald Trump wants the job of president but he doesn’t actually want to do the work involved.

This Bloomberg editorial is sharply critical of Trump’s apparent perspective. An active, engaged president is absolutely necessary to the success of a president’s reign, we learn.

But who defines success and what does it mean? Is it possible that a disengaged president might be more “successful” from the public’s point of view?

Perhaps the nation will find out if Trump wins.

The editorial relates that Trump sees himself playing the role of chairman of the board when it came to the presidency.

However, the article points out that the job of being president is effectively the job of a chief executive. That’s not just a title. It’s the job’s essence.

The presidency is a full-time, hands-on job, and it only works with a master politician in the Oval Office, obsessively building up his or her ability to influence all those the president must work with.

… Executive-branch agencies won’t do what the president wants without active management (indeed, it’s hard even for engaged presidents to get them to). … When presidents become disengaged, the results can be disastrous.

Obama can be seen as a somewhat detached president given the amount of vacations he’s taken and rounds of golf played.

Even his travel costs are significant. McClatchy reported that the price tag of the Obamas’ 2015 trips included some $11.6 million for travel costs alone. That brought the overall cost for travel to at least $70.5 million since Obama took office in 2009.

But when Obama wasn’t traveling or vacationing, he was costing the US taxpayer even more money via programs he supported. Obamacare for instance, essentially nationalized one sixth of the US economy. And costs keep going up.

Recently, reports estimated that the legislation was about $136 billion more expensive than anticipated. But was the legislation even necessary?

Prior to World War II, no public health care existed. But during World War II, corporations began including health care to attract employees. This pattern persisted after the war.

After the war, Medicare and Medicaid became law and the government began paying for the health care of seniors and poor people.

And then under Obama, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed. This is known as Obamacare.

Obamacare gives health-insurance coverage to about 15% of the US population that didn’t have it.

But in order to make Obamacare work, all Americans have to buy insurance, no exceptions. Also businesses with more than 50 full-time employees must provide health-care coverage.

We can see that Obamacare forces people to buy health-care insurance. This is a huge gift to insurance companies, which have effectively been monopolized.

Additionally, Obamacare gives health care to people who didn’t have it before. These people used to go to the emergency room when they needed treatment, or found a doctor who would treat them for little or no cost.

Before government got involved, people worked out health care issues for themselves. If people didn’t have health care, doctors took care of them nonetheless, as did hospitals.

But now government mandates health care and instead of a robust and flexible system, everyone is forced to pay into a system that enriches insurance corporations.

People are resentful while monopoly health care practices hugely distort costs. Medical innovation is damped because the bureaucracy will only pay for certain treatments.

Fewer and fewer doctors want to work within the current system and thus the number of health care professionals is contracting.

Because the system is so rigid and bureaucratic, it has a great deal of trouble adapting to change.

This is one reason for the vaccine scandals. In a more open environment the truth about negative effects of vaccines would have been disseminated. Instead it these effects have been concealed, creating a huge controversy that further polarizes people’s attitudes toward Western medicine.

Western medicine has moved away from the age-old traditions of naturopathy and adopted an allopathic model in which ailments are “fixed.” The total body is not tended to, only symptoms.

This is the system that Obama reinforced with his legislation. This is the “work” he did, which Bloomberg speaks of:

For presidents to be effective, there is no substitute for Max Weber’s “slow boring of hard boards.” … Trump himself hasn’t said this is how he would run things. But it isn’t hard to see why some of us are less worried about Trump’s authoritarian instincts than we are about chaos and incompetence in the White House.

Obamacare is actually a good example of how the political process works in a modern state.

It forces people to pay for services they don’t want, creates a medical monopoly that distorts prices and reduces professional participation, creates redundant services that were once offered voluntarily by providers and hampers innovation and creativity.

Conclusion: Within this context, the Bloomberg article makes little sense. Who wants an “efficient” president when the outcome of political processes almost invariably reinforce incompetence and degrades both goods and services?

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Praetor

    The U.S. citizen has no need for Monarchs, Tyrants nor Dictators. And very little patients for committee consensuses. In congress. we have a lot of committees, but little consensuses, and that is probably a good thing. The bad part is, we have to pay them to do nothing.

    If, Trump does nothing but cut government by half or more, during his term in office, he will have done a great service for ‘We The People’. His presidency, will have been deemed a success.

    This analysis is right on, DB. Would it not be nice if less than a million people worked for fedgov. Waste and fraud eliminated!!!

  • Bruce C.

    I have a feeling that this latest attempt to see what composition of mud will stick on Trump – suggesting that Trump may not want to actually be President – is bound to back fire on the “expert” pundits yet again. Besides the appeal of the “just say no to more government” approach, ironically, a lot of people are beginning to understand the admonition that those who desire powerful political office are automatically unfit for it.

    Remember, Trump supported at least two prior Presidential candidates – McCain and Romney – who failed to win and so this time he decided to do it himself. He probably would rather not enter “the teeming cesspit of scum and villainy that is Washington D.C.” but perhaps feels a calling for it under the circumstances. That’s what motivation “the Founders'” envisioned for the Republic’s representatives to have, and Trump may be threading that needle perfectly.

  • Boysie Dent

    Hello — I get your emails – I have been a recepient for several years –

    But when I try to open the links in thee emails –

    I am told that I am blocked – Ca you please explain why this is the case

    (PS) – I have no intention of agreeing to everything that you present in your articles —

    Regards

    Lloyd Sewell –
    boysie[at]boysie[dot]com

    • Haven’t heard of that one. We’ll look into it. In the meantime, you might want to cut and paste article addresses into your browser and gain access that way.

  • Kevin Kane

    Another site that publishes nothing but misinformation and Teabilly Taliban bulls–t. You guys SUCK!!!!!

  • autonomous

    “the outcome of political processes almost invariably reinforce incompetence and degrades both goods and services”
    Almost invariably? How about invariably? Active government is invariably destructive of good. And inactive government is application of excrement to sores. Saddles do not fit on human backs, nor are human backs suited to having riders aboard. The truism ‘liberty or death’ is true in that whatever reduces liberty inevitably brings death; it is not a choice that man faces but death follows the reduction of liberty. Liberty is a responsibility attendant on being born and can either be stolen or voluntarily relinquished.

  • no republicrat

    Get your headlines on Drudge and put the rest on Ignore.

  • Tsigantes

    Nobody knows what a president’s job is like – except past presidents. That much should be obvious.

    The Bloomberg article is Trump-bashing verbiage framed in a spurious theme delivered in the title and first sentence . The majority of readers will never get past the 2nd sentence since it is designed to be too boring to “read more”.

loading