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 (11284)	4/29/2002 5:48:07 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 21057

Of course, it is a political response to a public need. That is why it is called public service. It often is in response to a special interest or an inflexible ideological position rather then a matter of public service. Also even if a case may be made that a certain action is a good general public service paying for it is a matter of compulsion rather then the members of the public each freely accepting the service for a price. Which in my opinion is a good reason to have relatively minimum government. Unfortunately politicians have more power and influence if they can get government involved in more areas, which leads to a slight bias for expanding government. Over the years and decades this slight bias adds up to a huge increase in the size of government. I hope the bias is reversed somehow but I am not optimistic. Many politicians campaign on reducing the size of the government but at most they slow the size of its growth. Many of them don't even do that. Also the decreased growth rate doesn't seem to stick around for too long, the trend reasserts itself. You have very cavalierly tossed off your belittling comments against public employees, and insinuated by your stereotyping that they are of lesser character and ability Not at all. I said the incentives that they faced (or more accurately the incentives the the departments they work for and the politicians that set priorities face) are such that they are more likely to keep completely useless or counterproductive programs going. I don't think the character of public sector workers in general is worse then that of the workers in the private sector nor do I think their abilities are second rate. I do not think most public sector workers are lazy or that they are worthless or immoral people. I just think that politics (which provides the direction for the government) is a less efficient outcome that normally will lead to less efficient methods then the market even if the workers would otherwise be just as, or even a bit more, skilled and hard working than private sector workers. Of course efficiency is not the only important goal. Democracy and freedom are fairly well protected by our government. They don't do a perfect job but no one ever has. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next