Analogies are fun, but good luck using them to change someone’s mind.

I’ve heard plenty of conservatives in the US (and everywhere else) say the economy is like a household and the president is like a CEO.

The household analogy is simple: the government must live within its means. But what is true for a household is not necessarily true for a government. For instance, if a household cuts spending by 10%, it will have a negligible effect on the wider economy. But I don’t need to tell you what would happen if a government cut spending by 10%.

Yet what really rustles my jimmies is the president-as-CEO analogy. It is head-shakingly bad. Do they not know that a CEO gets the final say on budget, personnel and strategy?

While it’s a bit different in a Westminster system, a US president has access to none of these. In fact, the US government would run perfectly well if the White House was just a house.

The thing is, the Executive Branch in the US doesn’t execute much at all. When a department does something silly, which branch does it testify before? A State Department official isn’t called to the White House to explain herself. She is called to Congress. In other words, the Legislative Branch manages the Executive with little things called “laws.”

It wasn’t always this way. Back in FDR’s days, the Executive was much more powerful, and maybe then the president was like a CEO. But no longer.

So, forget about the CEO analogy. It isn’t convincing.

Donald Trump says he wants to bring US troops back from Afghanistan before he leaves. He’s having a bit of trouble. But since he’s the commander in chief, it should be his decision, right?

Well, during the Nixon presidency, Congress passed the Impoundment Control Act 1974. This law says while the president can get funds for a plan, it is illegal for him to refuse to spend the appropriated money on that plan. So, if having troops in Afghanistan costs money, but Trump doesn’t want them there, the law says the expensive troops must stay in Afghanistan.

For any conservatives reading this, I offer a replacement analogy.

Imagine if your business was run by 435 CEOs. And the way they run this company is by outlawing some things and not others. Does that sound like a business? Of course not. It’s a government. They’re completely different things.

But, like I said, this probably won’t change anyone’s mind.