The Founders had a lot of arguments when writing the Constitution about how much power this federal government they were creating should have. They were so worried about it that when it came time to get the document ratified they quickly added the first ten amendments, the Bill of Rights.
They had listed powers for the federal government quite carefully. Things like raise an army, coin money, run a postal service and regulate commerce between the states. The fear was that the government would seize powers they didn't think it should have. That's the gist of the 9th and 10th amendments. The 9th specifies that there are other powers that might not have been specifically mentioned and if there are, the people would retain them. The 10th specifies that it is really the states delegating power to the federal level and retaining anything not delegated to that federal level. In short, limited government was the goal.
Now, we've got this:
The Czar Dictates and Industry Will Comply
Consider the implications. Sure, the knee jerk reaction is that when the government sends you all of your operating capital then they get to tell you how to run your business. There is also the inevitable appeal to class envy. "I make ten bucks an hour, why should that bozo get paid two million a year?"
The answer, of course, might be because "that bozo" has qualifications for a job that you don't. But, I digress.
The essential questions should be more about the limits of the Constitution. Should a government be bailing out businesses? Should the government be establishing an ownership interest? Should government, after intervening, be making political rather than business decisions on the management?
And, the most important one of all: if you cut a CEO's compensation by 90% will he/she stay at work? If you can't offer compensation at rates that are competitive in a free market because the government is imposing populist policies will you have management that is going to enable your company to succeed?
No comments:
Post a Comment