Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (10675)	4/26/2002 11:44:29 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Your original accusation was that they are less productive. Now you accuse them of being less useful! Accusations are wonderful, If someone isn't doing useful work, or if they are doing counterproductive work then I would not consider them productive no matter how good they are at doing this work quickly and efficiently. Of course, by going out of business a Company does not become more productive. It simply goes out of business. The other unproductive companies continue down the stream toward bankruptcy; while new companies step into the river--some to beproductive and successful, and many others to fail. Exactly my point. If the company's productivity is to low or its product or service is useless it goes out of business. This 1 - Removes the unproductive or useless company, causing the private sector as a whole to be more productive and useful directly, and 2 - Provides and incentive for inefficient companies who are not quite as bad to improve before they follow the first company into oblivion. Its the creative destruction of capitalism, that normally doesn't function or at least function as well in the public sector. One of the reasons private companies fail is because they are started by untrained and unrealistic people pushing useless or unproductive ideas. And once they fail the resources no longer get wasted on that useless or unproductive idea. Too often their employees are uneducated, untrained, and unproductive. When the company goes bankrupt the same employees get hired by some other loser. It is a real vicious circle which tends to lock in unproductiveness and inefficiency at several levels of the private sector. This doesn't happen in the public sector because of a more comprehensive record keeping for public employees, as well as a more stringent acounting... When these unproductive employees find new jobs their new employees will eventually find out that they are useless and they can be fired. The public sector is at a disadvantage becaue it is harder to fire employees. I know public employees who are sooooo dedicated. The dedication of employees to their work depends upon their character. I agree that there are a lot that are very dedicated. Even a lot that are both dedicated and producing useful work that help the country as a whole and doesn't cost an unreasonable amount of money. I'm not bashing public sector employees. Many of them do excellent work under difficult conditions. Unfortunately their organizations do not face the same pressure to be at least reasonably useful and efficient that private companies in competitive industries face. Also the politicians actually have incentives to promise benefits or programs for special interests which may be against the general interest or may be impossible to deal with at a reasonable cost. I blame the politicians a lot more then I do the public sector workers. Tim