Smart Government – Innovative Ideas, not Ideologies
Solution-Oriented Government
- Effectuate solutions based on scientific theory, empirical evidence, and technological capability for the State.
- Highly efficient, agile, and effective government empowered to achieve more with less resources
Solutions
- Cut Wasteful Ineffectual Government Spending (WIGS)
- Introduce private sector best practices – agile management, data analytics, etc – to government
- Create optimal solution under the given constraints
Outcomes
- More productivity from government using less resources
- Cut taxes
- Revenue-generating government programs
- Solve, not simply manage, social problem
Explanation
- After 90 years of social assistance programs, poverty is still a major problem in our major cities. With a $1.5 trillion education debt, we have 25 million Americans unemployed or in low-paying jobs. Yale professor Yusuke Narita found that over $100 billion invested to support hospitals in offering services during the Covid Pandemic had virtually no effect. With career Politicians spending decades in office nursing the same policies and same problems, government is the only sector that can spend trillions of dollars over decades without solving the problem. Imagine the world if our phones, our music, and our cars had not changed since the 1970s. We must demand the same innovation and progress from our governments that we demand from our industries.
- When we throw money at problems without setting targets and evaluations or ignoring them as if they do not exist, the problem worsens, requiring higher levels of funding.
- A problem solving approach requires a solution-oriented government based on scientific theory, empirical evidence, and technological capability, not ideologies.
- The aforementioned Detroit i-Pool uplifts the economically disenfranchised, not through government assistance, but through collective capitalism, generating, not consuming, government revenue, unlike social assistance programs.
- NASA estimated that it would cost the agency $1.4 billion to develop the same systems which SpaceX designed at a cost $443 million, 3.5 times less (Jones 2018) highlighting both the problem and solution. Government agencies must adopt private sector best practices – agile management, data analytics, quantitative analysis, clear targets, etc. Additionally, government must take a problem solving, not problem mitigating approach.
- When we throw money at problems without setting targets and evaluations or ignoring them as if they do not exist, the problem worsens, requiring higher levels of funding.
- A problem solving approach requires a solution-oriented government based on scientific theory, empirical evidence, and technological capability, not ideologies.
- The aforementioned Detroit i-Pool uplifts the economically disenfranchised, not through government assistance, but through collective capitalism, generating, not consuming, government revenue, unlike social assistance programs.
Explanation
- Taxes are excessively high, not because of social programs, but because government is inefficient and funds ineffectual programs. Society pays a higher cost in crime, etc by ignoring social problems. Managing, not solving problems, allows them to worsen, requiring higher levels of taxes.
- Societal concerns resolved through a market-based framework that includes public-private sector collaborations and technological development fosters economic growth. Poverty can thus be eliminated, not through raising taxes and government subsidies, but through profits generated by business expansion and economic growth.
Solution-Oriented
Solutions
- Societal problems should be resolved, not managed and allowed to become bigger problems demanding higher levels of spending.
- Reliance on market-based framework that includes public-private sector collaborations and technological development that fosters economic growth
- Profit generating programs, creating renewable financing, not tax and spend policies.
- Favor incentive-centered design mechanisms over regulations to correct market failures.
Outcomes
- More effective, profit-generating government programs lead to less spending.
- Less spending leads to lower the tax burden on households and businesses
- Collective capitalism reduces friction between development and community stakeholders
- Less need for regulation
Explanation
- Taxes are excessively high, not because of social programs, but because government is inefficient and funds ineffectual programs. Society pays a higher cost in crime, etc by ignoring social problems. Managing, not solving problems, allows them to worsen, requiring higher levels of taxes.
- Societal concerns resolved through a market-based framework that includes public-private sector collaborations and technological development fosters economic growth. Poverty can thus be eliminated, not through raising taxes and government subsidies, but through profits generated by business expansion and economic growth. This market-based approach represents a renewable source of financing for social programs, rather than tax and spend policies. Less reliance on tax and spend policies lowers the tax burden on households and businesses. Collective capitalistic model in which community stakeholders are shareholders in business investments reduces friction between development and community stakeholders, requiring less regulation.
- Less regulation increases efficiencies as markets are dynamic but regulations are not. If a market correction resolves the market failure, subsequent legislation is required to remove the regulation whose effect might, at that point, do more harm than good (primum non nocere). Designing an incentive structure that promotes the desired outcome offers a more efficient alternative to regulation.
- This market-based approach represents a renewable source of financing for social programs, rather than tax and spend policies. Less reliance on tax and spend policies lowers the tax burden on households and businesses. Collective capitalistic model in which community stakeholders are shareholders in business investments reduces friction between development and community stakeholders, requiring less regulation.
- Less regulation increases efficiencies as markets are dynamic but regulations are not. If a market correction resolves the market failure, subsequent legislation is required to remove the regulation whose effect might, at that point, do more harm than good (primum non nocere). Designing an incentive structure that promotes the desired outcome offers a more efficient alternative to regulation.
Cut WIGS (Wasteful Ineffectual Government Spending)
Solutions
- End spending on programs that do not work
- Facilitate private sector and public-private solution-based collaborations
- Agile management diverting funding from ineffectual projects to effect ones
- Tools that bring private sector best practices to government projects and expenditures.
- Government programs that generate, not consume government revenue
Outcomes
- Lower tax burden for residents
- Solve, not just manage, Societal problems
Explanation
- Our priority is not on what to spend but on how to spend government resources. Resources must be spent in the most efficient and effective way. Our progressive-conservative platform relies on achieving more with less revenue. Hence, among our priorities are investments that promote high levels of efficiency, systems to facilitate public-private collaborations, and tools that bring private sector best practices – clearly identifiable targets, data analytics, quantitative analysis, agile project management, etc – to government projects and agencies.
Explanation
- Our priority is not on what to spend but on how to spend government resources. Resources must be spent in the most efficient and effective way. Our progressive-conservative platform relies on achieving more with less revenue. Hence, among our priorities are investments that promote high levels of efficiency, systems to facilitate public-private collaborations, and tools that bring private sector best practices – clearly identifiable targets, data analytics, quantitative analysis, agile project management, etc – to government projects and agencies.
- Additionally, we hope to develop programs that generate, not simply spend, revenue. The City of Detroit received almost $900 million in ARPA funds, none of which has been apportioned to revenue generating programs. While Michigan needs to upgrade its industrial base, manufacturing will remain a strong contributor to the economy. We need to invest in upgrading and supporting local firms in vertically integrating down the global supply chain (as China has done for its firms), a possible revenue generating investment for Michigan and its residents.
- Additionally, we hope to develop programs that generate, not simply spend, revenue. The City of Detroit received almost $900 million in ARPA funds, none of which has been apportioned to revenue generating programs. While Michigan needs to upgrade its industrial base, manufacturing will remain a strong contributor to the economy. We need to invest in upgrading and supporting local firms in vertically integrating down the global supply chain (as China has done for its firms), a possible revenue generating investment for Michigan and its residents.
Explanation
- A common roadblock to economic development stems from the benefits of development being concentrated among one segment of the population while the costs being isolated among another segment. By making residents and disadvantaged population segments shareholders in large scale development projects, they are incentivized to support those development projects in becoming as profitable as possible. The Detroit i-Pool, which I have co-designed, does that. The alternative is to cut through the roadblocks of community groups. While profitable in the short run, such an approach will generate negative public relations and stifle long term development.
- Moreover, low income families receive sustainable income, not through raising taxes and government subsidies, but through profits generated by business expansion. Hence, government spending on social assistance programs can be reduced.
- Additionally, this process generates business expansion and tax revenue, rather than subsidizing business expansions through tax cuts.
Development through Collective Capitalism
Solutions
- Resident and community groups buy equity stake and become shareholders in large scale development projects
Outcomes
- Remove hindrances to business development in MI
- High levels of business expansion and development provides sustainable income for residents
- Less government spending lowers the tax burden for residents and businesses
- Generates rather than spends government revenue
- Reduced need for government assistance programs
- Community stakeholders support development efforts rather than blocking them
- No Gentrification and negative public relations
- Stimulates economic growth
- Address societal concerns through market based framework
Explanation
- A common roadblock to economic development stems from the benefits of development being concentrated among one segment of the population while the costs being isolated among another segment. By making residents and disadvantaged population segments shareholders in large scale development projects, they are incentivized to support those development projects in becoming as profitable as possible. The Detroit i-Pool, which I have co-designed, does that. The alternative is to cut through the roadblocks of community groups. While profitable in the short run, such an approach will generate negative public relations and stifle long term development.
- Moreover, low income families receive sustainable income, not through raising taxes and government subsidies, but through profits generated by business expansion. Hence, government spending on social assistance programs can be reduced.
- Additionally, this process generates business expansion and tax revenue, rather than subsidizing business expansions through tax cuts.