is it universally agreed that government is inefficient?

[Bowfinger]

I take it you've never heard of profit sharing where employees get a piece of the profit? Management at all levels of a company is focused on achieving better results because their job depends on it. Not so much in government.

In most companies profit sharing is a marginal motivator. The fact is that individual employees have so little impact on the bottom line they don't feel a material connection between their actions and the bottom line. In any case, public employees have a similar motivation since they are taxpayers. Any efficiencies they add saves tax dollars, and thus saves them money. Except, of course, once again it's so diluted that it really isn't a significant motivator.

Further, much of the inefficiency in both government and the private sector comes from bureaucracy, red tape, process, whatever you want to call it. In general, the people who impose this overhead don't recognize that it's wasteful. It benefits their organization, therefore it's good for the company as a whole, right? In many cases, it may truly reduce costs for the group that imposes it. It just reduces efficiency -- and raises costs -- for everyone else.

 

[matt0611]

Fallacious reasoning.

Fallacious response.

You think the military cares about how much they are spending? There is very little incentive to keep costs down, they know they will always get more money.
They aren't even audited.
You think this kind of shit would last long in the private sector?
There's no entity better at wasting money than the government.

 

[Ninjahedge]

LMAO do you know how much waste there is in the DOD?
How overpriced all their equipment is?
That's enough evidence right there of how inefficient the government is.

Agreed, but do you know how much we were paying for the soldiers time from Blackwater?

Maybe we need to get our EQUIPMENT from them and the SOLDIERS from "home town" america like usual?

 

[Bowfinger]

Fallacious response.

You think the military cares about how much they are spending? There is very little incentive to keep costs down, they know they will always get more money.
They aren't even audited.

Running from you own words? Your remark to which I responded said "government" in general, not the military specifically. I've said throughout this thread that some parts of government are much better than others ... just like big corporations.

You think this kind of shit would last long in the private sector?
There's no entity better at wasting money than the government.

Yes, that's the right-wing dogma to be sure. They repeat it to you over and over just to be sure you're thoroughly indoctrinated. Real world experience shows otherwise. I can cite real world examples of private sector waste that matches anything I've seen in government, at least in proportion to the size of the organization. The fact is your simplistic black and white view of government vs. private sector is nonsense.

 

[PokerGuy]

In most companies profit sharing is a marginal motivator.

I agree with that.

Further, much of the inefficiency in both government and the private sector comes from bureaucracy, red tape, process, whatever you want to call it. In general, the people who impose this overhead don't recognize that it's wasteful. It benefits their organization, therefore it's good for the company as a whole, right? In many cases, it may truly reduce costs for the group that imposes it. It just reduces efficiency -- and raises costs -- for everyone else.

What you fail to take into account is that in a private sector company, at every level of management, people's performance is judged at least in part by customer service, efficiency and cost control. That top-to-bottom focus on customer service, cost and efficiency simply does not exist in the government since there is no competition to worry about.

 

[Thump553]

Here in CT we just had a major freak early snowstorm that broke lots of trees and caused widespread power outages. Talk to anyone in the state -regardless of idealogy-and they will tell you the same thing-the private company (CL&P) did an absolutely miserable job, without the state and especially local governments stepping up in unexpected roles we could have easily had a true diaster on our hands.

Government can and does do certain things far more efficiently than private companies, and vice versa.

 

[Tom]

layers and layers of bureaucracy, excess, unnecessary red tape and waste, isolated from market competition so there's no incentive to operate more efficiently, etc.

is there any argument against this?
enlighten me please.

Suppose there's a fire department near you, but you never need it.

Is that efficient or inefficient ?

Suppose a little more gvernment "red tape" in Japan would have prevented the Fukushima disaster.

Would that have been efficient or ineffecient ?

Government doesnt need to be any less efficient than any other organization of people. But government does more complicated things than most other groups of people, and inefficiency increases with complexity.

And of course, there's an industry based on attacking government; people make their living and get rich by attacking government, the same way people get rich making Coca Cola. They market it and if enough people buy into it they succeed, business-wise.

Doesnt mean that what they're selling is real, or good for you.

 

[actuarial]

What you fail to take into account is that in a private sector company, at every level of management, people's performance is judged at least in part by customer service, efficiency and cost control. That top-to-bottom focus on customer service, cost and efficiency simply does not exist in the government since there is no competition to worry about.

There is still competition for politicians though. If people would vote out politicians who encourage / maintain government waste if would force politicians to act.

 

[Lithium381]

the right has it figured out, the left seems confused....50% think it's efficient? really? which government are they living under? i suppose it depends on your perspective of efficient.....

 

[DucatiMonster696]

What's more inefficient - a public school with a budget of 2 million dollars and some extra protections causing inefficiency that educates kids, or a Wall Street firm with a 2 billion operation designed to do nothing but extract wealth from society adding no value, with nice big bonuses, done 'efficiently'?

How about we compare Apples to Apples? A public school vs private school and then we can compare their results? Naw that would be to much of a stretch for your false comparison.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Most yeah's are right or center. Big surprise eh? Asking a left leaner whether or not govt is efficient is about as efficient as govt.

There is a huge difference you are ignoring in your reasoning.

When government is consistently inefficient it raise taxes or prints more funny money.

When a business is consistently inefficient it goes out of business or is bought out by others who are more efficient in the market.

In the end government has no real incentive to be efficient in its operations or polices. More evidence of this can be seen in the cost of production for goods and services in a communist society vs a capitalist society.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Wishful thinking, in my experience. I've worked for three Fortune 100 companies, two levels of government, and several smaller companies. As a consultant I've worked with a couple dozen Fortune 500 companies, countless smaller businesses, and government at all levels. I've even held elected office for a couple of terms and have run my own business

Big government and big business have far more in common than they do differences. Both can be quite efficient; both can be woefully inefficient. It usually varies widely within a given organization, depending a lot on the culture and tone set by low- to mid-level leadership. Consequently, inefficient big companies generally remain profitable because their competitors are plagued by the same internal issues. In other words, they are comparably inefficient.

Who are you again? I'd love it if you verified your personal claims of authority on the issue by providing some credentials.

 

[Ninjahedge]

The problem is people are trying to boil this down to a cut-and-dry one-or-the-other comparison.

It just does not work that way.

No matter how black the hat, it always turns out grey when put against something darker.

 

[actuarial]

In the end government has no real incentive to be efficient in its operations or polices. More evidence of this can be seen in the cost of production for goods and services in a communist society vs a capitalist society.

And evidence against it can be seen in the cost of health care in socialist countries vs capitalist ones.

Which get backs to the point of: it depends on the service.

 

[ShawnD1]

How about we compare Apples to Apples? A public school vs private school and then we can compare their results? Naw that would be to much of a stretch for your false comparison.

You would need to compare the best government schools to the average private schools. This is because private schools don't have poor students with shitty parents who don't care about education, but that easily makes up 80% of the public school students. It's hard to make a direct comparison between the two.

Government can and does do certain things far more efficiently than private companies, and vice versa.

The military is surprisingly efficient when they are given an objective. If told to construct a bridge, they'll construct it very quickly. If told to move, they move fast. They can capture an entire country in mere weeks.

 

[Craig234]

How about we compare Apples to Apples? A public school vs private school and then we can compare their results? Naw that would be to much of a stretch for your false comparison.

Sure, when the private schools have to accept and educate well *every* student the public schools do and can't cherry pick.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Shaun, all you would have to do is compare similar demographics.

Northern Highlands Regional in Allendale is a good start, being as the median income of its students is MUCH higher than the usual.

Ramapo HS in Franklin Lakes is in the same boat.

Both schools kick ass on all the standardized tests and AP exams year after year (even with funds being cut and sent to "needy" schools)

You can also go for some of the target schools in NYC. They only admit the best, but they are still Public Schools......

i do not mind people makingthese comparisons, but so many do not know what really goes on with things like schools.

The PRIMARY FACTOR in schools is not public or private, or even how much money is spent. The primary factor is whether the kids, AND parents, give a shit.

 

[matt0611]

Running from you own words? Your remark to which I responded said "government" in general, not the military specifically. I've said throughout this thread that some parts of government are much better than others ... just like big corporations.



Yes, that's the right-wing dogma to be sure. They repeat it to you over and over just to be sure you're thoroughly indoctrinated. Real world experience shows otherwise. I can cite real world examples of private sector waste that matches anything I've seen in government, at least in proportion to the size of the organization. The fact is your simplistic black and white view of government vs. private sector is nonsense.

I'm not running, I'm giving a blatant example of government waste that everyone can see clearly.
Government is wasteful by its very nature.

 

[soccerballtux]

only that side over there...they are inefficient...not my side!!!

 

[DucatiMonster696]

You would need to compare the best government schools to the average private schools. This is because private schools don't have poor students with shitty parents who don't care about education, but that easily makes up 80% of the public school students. It's hard to make a direct comparison between the two.

Which is the point of why government is so inefficient because in the end they have to educate "EVERYONE" as they collect taxes to provide this services whether you want it or not and thus are obligated to do so but even government cant cater to the needs of "EVERYONE" efficiently without leveling heavy and debilitating taxes on the rest of society.

Thus this means they are then required to pump out a one size fits all education system that breeds inefficiency that becomes more rampant and inherent with its flaws as you pour more money into act of educating large groups of people.

Which then means these shitty parents and students have no incentive to care for what is being provided because after all "ITS FREE MONEY!!!" to them and there more where that came from right? So standards fall in order to cater to people who don't give a crap and who are insulated from their mistakes and wastefulness. Where a person paying for an education and their children are more apt to give a damn about the costs and consequences of pissing away said education.

The military is surprisingly efficient when they are given an objective. If told to construct a bridge, they'll construct it very quickly. If told to move, they move fast. They can capture an entire country in mere weeks.

In the military this means a person's life is not their own to do as they please. If a bridge needs to be built under a heavy barrage of incoming enemy fire then that someone will be forced into harms way if they are part of the bridge building crew. Regardless of their love of life and fear of physical harm that bridge will be built. In other words everything has a cost associated to it and a consequences.

However this doesn't translate well in the real world and the costs and consequence of doing "Whatever It Takes Damn IT!!!" will not always be palatable to those in civilian life where freedom and individual choice matter more.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'm not running, I'm giving a blatant example of government waste that everyone can see clearly.
Government is wasteful by its very nature.

You guys fail so hard at reasoning. Using your "logic", I'd like to offer Enron as a blatant example of corporate corruption that everyone can see clearly. Therefore, corporations are corrupt by their very nature. That's how it works, right?

 

[DucatiMonster696]

And evidence against it can be seen in the cost of health care in socialist countries vs capitalist ones.

Nice but can you explain to me what they give up in return for this socialize health care system because all these systems have negatives attached to them along with their benefits.

Which get backs to the point of: it depends on the service.

I agree it does depend on the service and depending on the service there will be benefits but also detrimental aspects that cannot be ignored.

Part of the issue in this nation is that medicine itself is undated with cost in one area (people marching into emergency rooms for headaches) while totally sheltered from cost and competition in other areas (hospitals being guaranteed payments by government and certain patients abusing services because its "FREE").

 

[DucatiMonster696]

You guys fail so hard at reasoning. Using your "logic", I'd like to offer Enron as a blatant example of corporate corruption that everyone can see clearly. Therefore, corporations are corrupt by their very nature. That's how it works, right?

Enron is an example of fraud not competition. In addition one could easily counter your example by offering examples of government fraud and waste that went unchecked because the costs of such fraud and waste were not automatically acknowledged or address government itself due to ill conceived and politically motivated social policies of "good intentions".

 

[Bowfinger]

Enron is an example of fraud not competition.

Once again, you guys fail so hard at reasoning. I didn't say Enron was an example of competition. WTF does that even mean?

In addition one could easily counter your example by offering examples of government fraud and waste that went unchecked because the costs of such fraud and waste were not automatically acknowledged or address government itself due to ill conceived and politically motivated social policies of "good intentions".

And yet again. So you're suggesting if I point out examples of waste in the private sector, it somehow proves the government is now efficient? No? Then WTF is your point exactly, and what does it have to do with what I said?

 

[ShawnD1]

Thus this means they are then required to pump out a one size fits all education system that breeds inefficiency that becomes more rampant and inherent with its flaws as you pour more money into act of educating large groups of people.

But they don't make a one size fits all solution. This is why every high school has normal math, honors math, and retard math.