Econ 101

Hidden Costs - that's always one of the big bugaboos when somebody's trying to teach you about how to run a business.

What about the hidden costs to taxpayers, and the corrosive effects of so many tax dollars finding their way into the offshore accounts of people who run very big, very profitable companies?  We don't hear that one mentioned very often - mostly what we get is that crap about Welfare Cadillacs and Food Stamp Lobsters.

hat tip = HuffPo

Spending puts money into circulation, which creates demand, which causes prices to go up, which makes it profitable to hire more workers, which creates supply, which requires spending, which puts money into circulation...

Ya gotta be careful with sustainability - nothing can expand forever - but without some kind of growth, there is no life.  So ya still gotta make that big ol' wheel go 'round.

Also too - ya gotta be a little careful and at least not completely fucking stoopid when it comes to how you spend all those bucks.

Wal-Mart is a fair example of a company just pretending to be all about the free market, while actually being a multi-billion-dollar leech.

And speaking of leeches:  Kinda related, here's a quick look at the empty promises (and outright fallacy) of another type of outfit turning nice fat profits (mostly) by trying to shoehorn something into Free Market Principles that won't fit and doesn't belong there in the first place:

However, operating non-profit charter schools can be very profitable for charter school executives like Eva Moskowitz. Moskowitz earns close to a half a million dollars a year ($485,000) for overseeing school programs that serve 6,700 children, which is over $72 per student.

--and--

The head of the Bronx Preparatory School earns $338,000 to manage schools with 651 students or over $500 per student.

--and--

The head of the Our World Charterearns $200,000 to manage schools with a total of 738 students or $271 per student.

--and--

The local head of the KIPP Charter Network earns $235,000 to manage schools with 2,796 or $84 per student.

--and--

By comparison, the chief educational officer of Texas is paid $214,999 to manage a system with almost 5 million public school students(*).

 (* = less than 5¢ per student.  A little arithmetic reveals that if the guy in Texas was being paid half of what Eva Moskowitz averages per student, he'd be pulling down $180 Million a year)

So, the only way you're gonna get the top talent is to throw fuckloads of money at people; but that only works in the "private sector" (and it seems to apply only to upper management, and not to the people who're doing the actual work at places like Wal-Mart); and throwing fuckloads of money works in the "private sector" when it comes to "educating" kids in Charter Schools, but you can't possibly expect the same results in Public Schools, cuz hey - we already tried throwing fuckloads of money at public schools and it didn't work, so the only thing that makes any sense at all is to throw fuckloads of money at private schools, where I'm sure doing exactly the same thing will in fact achieve a different result.

This isn't about Free Enterprise or Entrepreneurial Spirit or any of that Harvard Business School bullshit - the whole point of the exercise is to figure out how to funnel tax dollars into your own pockets.  Oorah - git some.

We are so fucked.