One of the most deeply flawed ideas championed by both President Donald Trump and his close ally Elon Musk is the notion that government should operate like a business.

Efficiency, streamlining, and eliminating redundancies—these are the buzzwords used to justify reshaping the federal government into a leaner, more agile machine, much like upgrading from an outdated 1995 Compaq desktop to a sleek 2025 MacBook Pro.

However, this approach overlooks a fundamental reality: the government is not a business. Unlike corporations, its primary purpose is not profit, nor does it serve shareholders or chase viral success. A well-functioning government should quietly ensure public safety and infrastructure stability—so that Americans don’t have to question whether their flights are safe or their tap water is clean.

That’s not to say government agencies are perfectly efficient. But not all redundancies are mere bureaucratic red tape. Take, for instance, a respected aviation safety commission that played a crucial role in coordinating the vast U.S. aviation industry. Trump disbanded it last week.

Less than two weeks into his administration, Trump has made it clear that he is running the White House with the same authoritarian style he applied to his businesses—most of which have been privately held, with no outside oversight. This leadership model aligns with Musk’s, who controls multiple private companies and Tesla, a public company where he has stacked the board with loyalists and frequently clashed with shareholders.

In the name of efficiency, Trump and Musk are enacting familiar cost-cutting measures, reminiscent of Musk’s corporate restructuring playbook—down to the same abrupt mass firings.

A Twitter-Style Purge

On his first day in office, the head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), who had previously clashed with Musk over SpaceX regulations, resigned. The position remained vacant for nine days—until, following a catastrophic midair collision over the Potomac River that killed 67 people, Trump appointed Chris Rocheleau, an aviation lobbyist and FAA veteran, as the new administrator.

By his second day, Trump had fired the leaders of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Coast Guard. On the third day, all members of a key aviation safety advisory committee were dismissed as part of what the administration described as an effort to cut unnecessary spending. Notably, this committee was created by Congress over 30 years ago in response to the Pan Am 103 bombing, and it played a vital role in shaping aviation security policies.

On the seventh day, Trump froze trillions in federal funding. The next day, the administration sent an email to 2 million federal employees offering them the option to resign, triggering widespread confusion and concern.

Among those affected were approximately 11,500 air traffic controllers, a workforce already stretched thin by staff shortages and burnout. The FAA previously reported that it was short 3,000 controllers despite increased hiring efforts.

Government in Crisis

Now, just ten days into the new administration, federal agencies responsible for critical services—such as aviation safety, water quality, and veteran housing—are in disarray.

While the exact cause of the Potomac River plane crash near Reagan National Airport remains unclear, the disaster is already testing the administration’s crisis response.

Predictably, Trump deflected responsibility, blaming previous administrations and making unsubstantiated claims that diversity initiatives had weakened aviation safety. His senior officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, echoed his statements without evidence.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of federal employees face uncertainty as they consider whether to accept the administration’s mass resignation offer—eight months of severance pay and benefits—though many question its legality and authenticity.

According to leaked private speeches from Russ Vought, Trump’s acting head of the Office of Management and Budget, this turmoil may be intentional. ProPublica reported last year that Vought explicitly stated, “We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected… We want them to wake up dreading work, knowing they are seen as the villains. We want their funding shut down… We want them in trauma.”

With essential services in jeopardy, the consequences of this "government as a business" approach are becoming alarmingly evident.