ShaklesOfBigGov
Restore the Republic
- Nov 19, 2010
- 5,077
- 749
And the notion of 'efficient' is meaningless absent an agreed upon definition.
Moreover, it's a fallacy to attempt to compare public and private sectors, given their different roles, responsibilities, and restraints, just as it's a fallacy to say that 'all' government agencies are 'inefficient.'
So C Clayton Jones response is that he is uncertain what the word efficent actually means. Perhaps you need to pull out the Webster's dictionary there bub.
When you look at how government runs things, we have a Post Office that is getting further in the red while constantly having to raise it's stamps, there is social security which is always underfunded with it's projected path towards bankruptcy is a reoccurring issue, the debt surrounding government continues to grow as a result. If the private sector competitors of the USPS ran their business the same way, they'd already be bankrupt, as the USPS expects to look to the government as an unlimited resource to combat it's own financial issues.
Government and efficiency? That's an oximoron if I have ever heard one. What possible program has government EVER ran where taxpayers actually found a surplus in, and government found themselves needed to actually CUT funding because it was managed so well? I can't find one government program without a growing debt attached to it.