USA Inc.

There’s a certain breed of politician – the self-styled “business genius” – who struts onto the political stage and declares that government should be run like a business. “USA Inc.,” they cry, as if the entire apparatus of democracy should be reorganised to mimic Amazon’s fulfilment centres or Goldman Sachs’ balance sheets. The problem? A country isn’t a company, citizens aren’t customers, and a president isn’t a CEO.

Take Trump, for example. His approach to governance was essentially the bullying tactics of a corporate raider – impose tariffs, make threats, then backpedal when reality bites. He treated trade negotiations with Mexico and Canada like a leveraged buyout, wielding unpredictability as if it were a genius strategy rather than a sign of impulsiveness. Sure, this might have extracted short-term concessions, but at what cost? Trust eroded, alliances frayed, and the global economy suffering unnecessary shocks. Nations aren’t hostile takeovers, and diplomacy isn’t a boardroom standoff.

Let’s start with the fundamental flaw: businesses exist to make a profit. Governments exist to serve their people. These are not the same thing. A business can shut down unprofitable divisions, slash headcounts, and outsource labour to Bangladesh. A government can’t just decide that the poor, the elderly, or the disabled are “bad investments” and cut them loose. Well, it can try – and some do – but history suggests that starving pensioners and gutting public services don’t exactly lead to long-term national stability.

Then there’s the ridiculous idea that citizens are “customers” who can simply take their business elsewhere. Where, exactly? Canada? Not everyone has the luxury of a second passport and a sudden affinity for moose. The point of democracy is that people are participants, not consumers. They have rights, not just transactional privileges. A business only has to care about its paying customers; a government has to look after everyone, including the economically inconvenient.

The “businessman-in-chief” types love to talk about efficiency – as if the sole purpose of governance is to squeeze every last penny from public spending. They see infrastructure, education, and healthcare as expenses to be trimmed rather than investments in national strength. They’d rather privatise and deregulate everything, then act surprised when bridges collapse, public transport is a joke, and insulin costs more than a second-hand Ford Fiesta. Some things are meant to be robust, not profitable. No sane person looks at the fire brigade and wonders how to increase shareholder value.

And speaking of priorities, what happens when you apply corporate logic to diplomacy? A CEO only cares about the bottom line. A president, however, is supposed to care about allies, security, and global stability. Treating international relations like a dodgy property deal turns friends into rivals and makes enemies bolder. The NATO alliance isn’t some two-for-one coupon scheme where you whinge about who’s paying more – it’s a collective security arrangement that has, inconveniently for the spreadsheet merchants, helped prevent World War III. Foreign aid, too, isn’t just a matter of charity – it fosters economic ties, stabilises fragile regions, and prevents problems before they reach our doorstep. But sure, let’s run everything like a business and see how long it takes for the geopolitical equivalent of Enron.

The most dangerous assumption of all, though, is that a president should wield power like a CEO. A CEO rules from the top, issuing commands that are carried out without question. A president operates within a messy, infuriating, but necessary system of checks and balances. Democracy isn’t efficient, and that’s the point. If you want efficiency, you’ll find it in a dictatorship. You’ll also find a distinct lack of freedom, justice, and accountability – minor details, apparently, for the “get things done” brigade.

A government run like a business would, in the end, treat its people the way corporations treat employees: disposable when inconvenient, replaceable if inefficient, and ignored unless profitable. It would prioritise short-term gains over long-term well-being, cut public services to the bone, and run roughshod over the very institutions that make democracy functional. It would create a society that values profit over people, efficiency over ethics, and power over principle.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Trump’s war on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Set up to rein in predatory lenders and keep banks from robbing their customers blind, the CFPB has long been a thorn in the side of the financial elite. Naturally, Trump and his cronies want it gone. Without it, payday lenders and credit card companies will have free rein to gouge the poor, banks will return to the reckless practices that nearly crashed the economy in 2008, and students will find themselves trapped in even more exploitative loan arrangements. Consumer protection? That’s bad for business! And what’s bad for business, in the dystopian world of USA Inc., must be stamped out. The real winners? Wall Street, corporate lobbyists, and every slick financial predator waiting to make a quick buck at the expense of ordinary Americans. The losers? Well, just about everyone else.

So no, the USA – or any country, for that matter – should not be run like a business. A nation isn’t a balance sheet, and its people aren’t shareholders. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either dangerously naive or exactly the sort of corporate sociopath who shouldn’t be anywhere near elected office. If you want to play CEO, go and buy a company. Leave the business of governing to those who understand that people, not profits, are what truly matter.