government treasury spending

[franky1]

the most annoying thing people find about governments is their decisions about what to spend treasury money on

for instance, wars in foreign countries are funded by treasury "defense" money. yet obviously are "offiensive" used.

so when countries invade other countries for land disputes of oil rich locations. should governments treat the acquisition of these plots of land as a public asset. meaning the government then create the fuel to sell direct to citizens to get funds back to recoup the initial funding.
should the government just hand it to private companies and then charge that companies customers large tarrifs/sales tax. meaning no risk/bad side for corporation. and risk is on treasury/citizens
or should private companies fund these 'exploration' missions and 'defense' missions and then get to keep what they find. no tax out no tax in. where risk is on the corporation

..
other things like the movie industry and factory industry which has local governments bid to companies with different state tax benefits/grants/reductions to get them to set up a business in their state to increase employment options,
if say there are 50k possible new employment oppertunities at $40k a year. and knowing over a year that causes a fund circulation and taxation that can end up as being $20k per employee into the treasury.
($1bill into treasury) along with no longer having to give social security benefits to those 50k people means that it can be a total of $1.5bill going into treasury.
should states give corporations 'tax breaks' /grants/ reductions of over $1.5b in this scenario

..
in short what im asking is if you had full control of treasury spending and decisions. would you want taxes to go to protect corporations at the loss of citizens. or protect the citizens at a loss of corporations

which lines would you draw where you have seen examples of wasteful spending

[1714327419]

1714327419

[1714327419]

1714327419

[1714327419]

1714327419

[1714327419]

1714327419

[Cryptoababe]

so when countries invade other countries for land disputes of oil rich locations. should governments treat the acquisition of these plots of land as a public asset. meaning the government then create the fuel to sell direct to citizens to get funds back to recoup the initial funding.
should the government just hand it to private companies and then charge that companies customers large tarrifs/sales tax. meaning no risk/bad side for corporation. and risk is on treasury/citizens
or should private companies fund these 'exploration' missions and 'defense' missions and then get to keep what they find. no tax out no tax in. where risk is on the corporation

Here, the best thing government can do is to treat acquisition of the plot as public assets. By creating the fuel and selling it to citizens to get fund back to recoup the initial funding. With this citizens can benefit from the plot. Especially when the government makes it easy and cheaper for citizens it the government don't look forward to making huge profits.

And if I have full control of treasury spending and decisions, I wouldnt want taxes to go to protect citizens at loss of cooperations. I would rather find a means to reduce the tax fee from the citizen instead of making it go. And when proper decision is made.With time, There will be equilibrium and both the cooperation and citizens won't be at loss.