billboard.jpgIn my post the other day about the frivolity of the web, I wrote about how there are many sites out there that seem frivolous to me.  Thinking more about the topic, most of these sites are ad-driven.  In the example I gave about the food fight application built on the FaceBook API, a FaceBook user earns "money" by answering questions posed by advertisers.

Everything these day's is ad-driven, from search engines, to social sites, even the oft rumored Google Phone.  What's stopping us from extending this model to our governmental system?  We could lower taxes and supplement with advertising dollars.

For example, when the government claims imminent domain on a piece of land in order to put a highway through they usually take enough land for the road and a little extra.  Instead I propose you take more, say 100 yards on either side of the highway.  That land, owned by the government, can then be used by advertisers to put up billboards, at a cost of course.  You could set up any number of arrangements.  You could even have a scenario where one advertisers pays a much higher rate because they don't want other advertisers.  This of all of the federal and state highways now and all of the money that would be generated by advertisers.  Most advertisers already pay to advertise on interstates.  This program would simply shift the money going to some lucky farmer who's farm got sawed in half by a road to the government instead.

Continuing down this road, social security checks could be emblazened with the logo of an advertiser.  What better way to advertise, the money you hold in your hand is telling you where to spend it!

You want governmental health care?  No problem, first you simply have to listen to a few ads and answer questions about the ads before you can see a doctor.  Customers who have insurance can opt out of the ads.  It's a win win!

If ad-driven revenues really work, as they seemingly have by surveying the Web 2.0 landscape, let's use that to solve some of our governmental problems.  You'll lower taxes making the conservatives happy.  You'll be able to offer more services, making liberals happy.


 
Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:58:35 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Holy crap, dude. This might sound like a good idea on the surface, but could you imagine what it would look like in the real world? We're already deluged with way, way too many messages trying to get us to buy things we can't afford. Increasing these message will only put people more into debt and further promote the empty ideas of materialism as happiness.

Have you ever seen the movie 'Brazil'?
This post reminds me of the bleak, bleak road filled with advertisements to mask the desolation of the land behind them.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:03:51 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Also:
"This program would simply shift the money going to some lucky farmer who's farm got sawed in half by a road to the government instead."

WTF? I hope you are joking about this...
Wednesday, October 17, 2007 6:16:36 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Michael,

I'm only partially joking. While I realize Americans are overspending the government doesn't benefit. The option that large corporations pay for it via advertising versus raising taxes or cutting programs.

We can't manufacture money, so if we have all of these "bills" (social security, medicaid) then how are we going to pay for it?
Comments are closed.