The sales test

By Jim Thompson
HCP columnist

I am only aware of two categories of organizations in the United States that can make you an offer you can’t refuse. One is organized crime and the other is the federal government (state and local governments lack this power — you can move fairly easily to beyond their reach).

Organized crime and the federal government have the power of the gun to make you buy what they want to sell you. The feds seldom have to use it — most raise their hands and are willingly thrown in jail as opposed to be shot for trying to avoid arrest.

When private enterprise attempts to make you buy their products at their artificially high prices, we call it monopoly and, ironically, use the federal government to stop such nasty behavior.

Simultaneously, in the New York Times, editorials are written decrying such vile companies, editorials cozily adjacent to ones praising the latest harebrained scheme out of Washington which you will be forced to buy.

What if the federal government was required to offer its products and services on a level playing field with private companies? What if Social Security was offered but optional? What if Medicare was offered but optional? What if Obamacare was offered but optional?

What if any federal government program had to compete with private enterprise for customers?

We would see entirely different federal government social programs, wouldn’t we?

The never stated conditions of federal programs are that they are shoved down our throats with the efficiency of a mafia don sending around their enforcer to collect protection money. You can hand this to the feds: They really do have the collection part operating fairly efficiently.

If the branches of the federal government had to work on a level playing field, even an old conservative like me might get behind some of their programs. The main sticking point is that they are not efficient programs; they are ineffectively operated and forced upon us.

The latest “sales pitch” for Obamacare is a good example.

The proponents run around acting as if they have put this into law as some sort of gigantic mandate. Their memory is short and they hope yours is, too.

This passed by the absolute minimum of margins and squeaked through the Supreme Court because the Chief Justice has an inferiority complex. It is hardly some broad-ranging mandate.

But still there must be a sales pitch. And the sales pitch has nothing to do with providing superior services to any alternative (because, after all the feds don’t have to — they can make us buy this rotten product).

The sales pitch is it is “the law of the land.”

What a joke of an argument. Let’s see, what else has been “the law of the land” in the past? Slavery is a good place to start. So is voting being only reserved for males over 21. How about prohibition? How about “separate but equal?”

Many, many things have been “the law of the land” and later determined to be not such good ideas.

This argument is hollow and many are making it — but it is not original to me. In my company, my team regularly spends many hours working on our “value proposition” — in other words, what is the argument we can give existing customers and prospects to persuade them to buy our services? It is a never-ending task consuming vast amounts of time and treasure.

Much of the effort is wasted as we continue to try to get it right. But that is the mandate when you have clients and prospects who have choices.

Design programs that you really have to sell us, Federal Government, and this pundit will lose half the fodder for his column. It is time to stop forcing us to buy poorly design programs just because you can use the power of the IRS as your enforcer.

Jim Thompson is a columnist for The Highland County Press.