posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 03:50 AM
If my home were run like the U.S. government, the person spending the money would have no control over how much money could be raised, and the person
raising the money would have no control over how much money was being spent.
Every couple of years, they would fail to agree on the household budget, the money-raiser would go on strike, and they would both starve in the dark
while all the bills were going unpaid.
All this was laid down in a written agreement which they both worship, so it can't be changed.
If my home were run like the British government, the person raising the money would also be the person making the spending decisions. If the power to
raise money got transferred to somebody else, the spending decisions would get transferred at the same time, so there would be no conflict.
The American approach would have been tried briefly a couple of centuries ago; not having a written agreement enforcing it, they would have had the
luxury of deciding that it didn't work and giving it up.
edit on 19-12-2015 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)