Special Commentary by Ken Dufty, owner of Clocks N Stuff in Exmore, Virginia
When I considered transitioning from government employ to the private sector as a retail merchant over 15 years ago, I sought mentoring from small business folks who had much more experience than I in retail trade. After interviewing a number of these local legends in rural upstate New York, my notebook highlighted the “do’s and don’ts” associated with achieving success in this often shortlived occupation, and the pages were replete with a full description of the minefields could prove fatal to a profitable trade. Page one in the “do” column contained bold directives including the golden rule of treating your customers with respect, compassion, and fairness. Following close on those heels was to keep your overhead low and try never to be “undersold”. And on that same page, and sharing the top of the list, (and relevant to the topic of this letter) is to never engage your customers in debate or argument over religion or partisan politics. After all, they warned, taking one side or the other in either of these topics will alienate certain prospective customers who do not share your politics or faith, and it is the commercial equivalent of shooting yourself in the proverbial foot. So true to that course, the thoughts I share with your readers today take no position on what either political party is advocating nor does it defend or oppose any one candidate or political party. It is just a simple dissertation on the difference between the historic role of government versus the laudable role of business and commerce. As a footnote, much as I sought counsel from established merchants years ago, a decade earlier I had to seek counsel from elected officials when they tapped me to lead environmental management services in our large upstate county in NY. After all, I was a mechanic in a steel mill and really knew little about the inner workings of county government…and I had to learn fast.
So I chose the oldest, wisest, and most respected legislator in the chambers, Vice Chairman Ed Swartz (now deceased) and asked him for a few hours of his time before I was officially confirmed by the legislature.
Again, out came the notebook. Number one, he lectured, was to never ask a question unless I knew the answer first. He told me that HE would be asking me many questions about the management of our county natural resources and other issues during my tenure, and cautioned me to be very careful before sharing a response! Finally, quoting Lincoln, he enlightened that government’s primary role is to “do for the people what they cannot do for themselves” and that business and government are two entirely different animals and the two are not to be confused.
Government he expounded, performs the services for the people that business can not, because the performance of those services are not profitable. The list he shared included: the protection of our food, water, air and environmental overall health (like the CDC); the safety of our bridges, roads, and transportation, including airline safety (NSA); energy supply and infrastructure; education; health care and support services; sewer and water facilities; emergency response and management (including the Coast Guard); low income housing; oversight of our social safety nets such as building safety, medicare, medicaid, special needs education, food stamps,….and on and on.
Vice Chairman Swartz reasoned that government’s overall concept is that people who are able pay their taxes deposit their societal contributions into what is basically a large financial cauldron. Then the citizenry of voting age elects leaders to (hopefully) spend that money responsibly on the things that businesses could never sustain, knitting together the social fabric that supports our representative Republic in a sustainable manner.
Business is the matter of commerce that generates profits, and rather than being “for the people, by the people” is more akin to “by the corporations for the CEO’s, business owners, and the shareholders”. Both are necessary, and the historic role of business and commerce not only enrichens the investors, but at the same time is designed to fatten the cauldron’s coffers, in an ideal world.
As anyone following the news lately can see, there seems to be a blurring of the role of government and business on the federal level, and perhaps there is a swing to that pendulum that could be beneficial to both worlds. But we must keep in mind that business is not government, and government is not big business. And losing that perception may result in a loss far greater than we might have thought when advocating for the change that now seems to be underway.
About the Author
What a thoughtful, insightful explanation of the role of government. As an entrepreneur running an engineering consulting firm who has worked for the Federal Government (civil service) and in private industry, I understand the different mindset between government institutions, private industry and entrepreneurs.
Regarding your description of the role of business needs some help. “…enriches the investors, but at the same time is designed to fatten the cauldron’s coffers” – am I the only person who hears hostility and bias in this statement?
Like government, business has a higher purpose – to provide goods and services to consumers, to provide a source of income to folks not willing or able to become entrepreneurs, to reward folks who take risk – through investing money and/or time to create and sustain a business.
During the last twenty years, the greatest challenge for government is to understand the boundaries of their role and responsibility and to accept the role of business – both the tangible role in creating wealth (e. g. taxpayers) and the intangible role of the mindset of business: efficient, innovative, agile.
Setting aside the unhelpful emotional reactions to the current president, his business mindset is questioning all of the assumptions made by the last several administrations (of both parties).
The government’s role in the economy is to balance regulation with commerce; government does not create jobs, grow a nation’s wealth or take risk.
Without reasonable regulation, we would lose the outcomes of the common good; without sufficient freedom of capitalism, we would lose the American Dream to achieve, to innovate, to create wealth.
My hope is that we can set aside our personal, emotional issues to talk about the value of both government and business.
Delighted in reading Ken Duffy’s article. Thanks for printing, CC Mirror. And yes, I, like Ms. Huchler, noticed a “tone” in his article. But, I, unlike her can see the warning in such a statement. I see daily, on the local level, how government is here to assist a business in getting a leg up. Just as they are there to shut down and/or punish some businesses who step outside the bounds of codes and regulations and the like. Governments should act as guidelines. They intend a set of codes and regulations, and the public follows these codes. But government is not in the game to be a business. They encourage it and sometimes even go out of their way to procure new businesses.
I think the message is muddled at the end of Ken’s article with the statement of the “blurring of the role of government and business on the federal level”. But, there should be no confusion here. Our government has meddled in the affairs of business since the times of Hamilton. It has been woven into the very fabric of our nation. We’ve gone so far in the past seventy years to stick our noses into other countries business. Central and South America during the Banana Wars come to mind. The banana wars came about due to corruption and labor abuse throughout Latin America. The United States had a vested interest with these countries in the form of the United Fruit Company. Long story short…troops were sent in, the rich land owners retained their status and the impoverished workers went back to being exploited. Just one example of the American government interfering in business.
There are dozens and dozens of these examples all around the world where the United States have sent young Americans in to maintain the status quo within a region to ensure that specific interests will continue to be beneficial to the American public. In my honest opinion, that is an overreach and a breach of governmental protocol. I am pretty sure Ms. Huchler was speaking to just the inside the boundaries conduct of business when she wrote “The government’s role in the economy is to balance regulation with commerce; government does not create jobs, grow a nation’s wealth or take risk.” To that point, I must shine a light. That is exactly what this government has been doing for the past seventy years around the world. We have been risking war, spreading misery, killing innocents, and have carried the image of the Ugly American for way too long. Whatever moral collateral we gained by the end of 1945, we’ve spent in spades since 2003. Unfortunately, big business is in bed with our government. Wall Street governs the businesses now. Not the other way around. Wages are predicated on one’s station in life, not real skills. CEO’s of some of the top performing companies are making over three hundred and fifty times the normal salary of their paid workers. Our federal government protects that.
Ms. Huchler asks me to set aside my emotions and my personal issues for this administration. With all due respect, but that’s just not going to happen. Not when the election slogan (one of several) was “Drain the Swamp!” Clearly meant to indicate big changes and new ways of doing business in Washington. But then Trump went and loaded the swamp with billionaires, several with connections to Wall Street and the banking systems. Big business wins again. We have someone willing to turn back the regulations on the EPA and omissions from automobiles. How is this a public protection? Who benefits from tearing down regulations that have been in place for over thirty years? Is that an idea of “balance” within regulated commerce? So, now profits have gone up for both automotive companies AND health care. Great business move, direct from the swamp. Find me the value in that!
There is a cartoon from the New Yorker showing an adult with three children sitting around a campfire, desolation in the back ground. The adult states; “Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.” That’s the feeling I get whenever our government takes action nowadays. Thanks for the read, Ken.