THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Solon who wrote (10618)	4/24/2002 8:30:56 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 21057

Solon, companies are more productive and efficient because if they are not they go bankrupt. Public sector employees are not inherently more efficient but the organizations they work for face less incentive to be efficient. They agencies will probably still exist, and often grow even if they are very inefficient. If they are efficient and spend less they are likely to just get their budgets cut anyway. Public sector employees are not more evil or stupid then private workers, but the incentives they and the people who manage them face are different. Indeed, I would suggest to you that a major reason why companies DO go bankrupt is BECAUSE they are being INEFFICIENT and UNPRODUCTIVE. Exactly. This reduces the number of inefficient companies because if they are inefficient and unproductive they go bankrupt and if they remain that way they never come out of bankruptcy. The fact that some companies go bust reduces the inefficient and unproductive companies. The fact that other companies become afraid that they might go bust forces them to become more productive and efficient. Also there is more reward for the company when they become productive and efficient and properly focused. The company makes profits, its employees are more likely to get raises or see their stock options or profit sharing shares, or company matched 401k shares increase in value. In government it is different. Individual employees may (or may not) be awarded for saving money, but if a government agency finds that it can do the same job it is doing now with half the employees and 60% of the budget and actually tries to implement the plan most likely it will get its budget cut. Perhaps the head of the agency might get some political reward by getting the job as head of a bigger agency, or he might be seen as a great manager and get hired for bigger bucks by a private company, but many of the senior people in the agency will have less power, and no increase in wealth. They have less incentive to be efficient so they are less efficient. Simple idea. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next