Can Any Dem/lib Tell Us What Agency The Govt Has Run Efficiently?

[Redfish]

already answered. complete the job on or under budget= efficient.

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2008/wp08228.pdf

thanks for making my point. From your cite

"
efficiency of government spending has become one of the key issues in public finance. In
the advanced economies and many transition countries, higher efficiency of spending seems to
be the only way to avoid that public services are squeezed out between the opposing forces of
age-related expenditure and rising tax competition (Heller and Hauner, 2006). In low-income
countries, increased expenditure efficiency will have to complement increased social expenditure
if the Millennium Development Goals are to be reached. Emerging markets, in turn, may seem
under less pressure of this kind, given their rapid growth, but it is well-known that the demand
for public services tends to rapidly increase as countries become richer (the so-called Wagner
effect), and higher efficiency will be the only way to avoid a large increase in the tax burden.
Moreover, good government is also of more general concern, as it has been shown, for example
by Easterly and Levine (1997), that it is a crucial determinant of economic growth."

In no way was I ever disagreeing with you, I was just asking you to provide a legitimate conceptual standard that is used within policy circles rather than talking out of your ass like a moron, which is what you've done every time I've asked for a standard definition. I wanted citations, not some weak, "any time X goes a dollar over it's inefficient."

I gave you the dictionary definition of efficient. Then I further clarified that completing the job at or under budget is efficient.

I cannot help it if you disagree with those simple words, or don't understand them.

I pointed out why the dictionary definition wasn't sufficient. Frankly, it took you 21 pages of your own thread to be coerced into conceptualizing what you were asking people to talk about.

Sorry, if you missed it. I was clear from the beginning. The question was, and is, why do liberals want to turn more of our economy over to the the government when we all know that the government has never operated efficiently, the specific question was, and is, related to healthcare.

Some of you on the left tried to highjack thread by challenging the definition of efficient. So I clarified that.

None of you has provided a cogent response to why you want the government to run more and more of your lives, and waste more and more of your money.

Is it because none of you pay income tax? Is it because you are all takers and parasites?

 

[candycorn]

Its funny because this thread is about liberals not being able to tell what govt runs efficiently but when you ask them who should run certain things they say private industry that also isnt efficient and dont answer to anyone.

When a private industry does not operate efficiently it goes out of business. Private industries are accountable to their owners or shareholders. Who is the government accountable to?

The voters. We do have elections every 2 years on the federal side of things.

Redfish doesnt understand that being accoutable to Shareholders doesnt mean jack if they are making money. If the private business is ripping us off guess what? Redfish will complain about govt overreach when they move on the private business

makling money for shareholders is the sole reason that corporations exist. Thats why we have laws to prevent price fixing, illegal trusts, and ripping of the public. Thats why Madoff is in jail. thats why Enron was destroyed. Where are the examples in government similar to Madoff and Enron?

Since government is, by definition, non profit, such examples of entities going out of business due to ripping off shareholders does not exist. Madoff is in jail, so are/were about a dozen public servants I can name off of my head (Rostenkowski, Blogovich, Jackson, Jr, Edwards just missed going to jail, Rick Perry has been indicted, Tom Delay was found guilty....)

You really suck this. This is something like the 10th time you've been shot down in your own thread.

 

[Redfish]

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2008/wp08228.pdf

thanks for making my point. From your cite

"
efficiency of government spending has become one of the key issues in public finance. In
the advanced economies and many transition countries, higher efficiency of spending seems to
be the only way to avoid that public services are squeezed out between the opposing forces of
age-related expenditure and rising tax competition (Heller and Hauner, 2006). In low-income
countries, increased expenditure efficiency will have to complement increased social expenditure
if the Millennium Development Goals are to be reached. Emerging markets, in turn, may seem
under less pressure of this kind, given their rapid growth, but it is well-known that the demand
for public services tends to rapidly increase as countries become richer (the so-called Wagner
effect), and higher efficiency will be the only way to avoid a large increase in the tax burden.
Moreover, good government is also of more general concern, as it has been shown, for example
by Easterly and Levine (1997), that it is a crucial determinant of economic growth."

In no way was I ever disagreeing with you, I was just asking you to provide a legitimate conceptual standard that is used within policy circles rather than talking out of your ass like a moron, which is what you've done every time I've asked for a standard definition. I wanted citations, not some weak, "any time X goes a dollar over it's inefficient."

I gave you the dictionary definition of efficient. Then I further clarified that completing the job at or under budget is efficient.

I cannot help it if you disagree with those simple words, or don't understand them.

I pointed out why the dictionary definition wasn't sufficient. Frankly, it took you 21 pages of your own thread to be coerced into conceptualizing what you were asking people to talk about.

Sorry, if you missed it. I was clear from the beginning. The question was, and is, why do liberals want to turn more of our economy over to the the government when we all know that the government has never operated efficiently, the specific question was, and is, related to healthcare.

Some of you on the left tried to highjack thread by challenging the definition of efficient. So I clarified that.

None of you has provided a cogent response to why you want the government to run more and more of your lives, and waste more and more of your money.

Is it because none of you pay income tax? Is it because you are all takers and parasites?

where did you go, tobasco? give up? admit defeat? run off ?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

You guys keep ranting about turning all of medicine over to the government. What has the government ever run efficiently? the post office? DOD? Social security? medicare? welfare? border security? the budget?

Why would you want to turn more of our economy over to them?

The military.

From someone who has served, the military is full of excessive wasteful spending ... it's hardly efficient

 

[Harry Dresden]

How are you defining efficiently? Is there a threshold in which you classify something as not efficient?

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

with a big operation that is tough to do.....private or public....

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

 

[bripat9643]

How are you defining efficiently? Is there a threshold in which you classify something as not efficient?

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

with a big operation that is tough to do.....private or public....

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

 

[Harry Dresden]

How are you defining efficiently? Is there a threshold in which you classify something as not efficient?

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

with a big operation that is tough to do.....private or public....

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

lets see.....that every huge corporation has waste?....gee was it that tough to figure out?....

 

[bripat9643]

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

with a big operation that is tough to do.....private or public....

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

lets see.....that every huge corporation has waste?....gee was it that tough to figure out?....

Yeah, so they have waste. So what?

 

[Harry Dresden]

with a big operation that is tough to do.....private or public....

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

lets see.....that every huge corporation has waste?....gee was it that tough to figure out?....

Yeah, so they have waste. So what?

read the dam thread Bri.....Redfish is basically saying if you have any waste at all you aint an efficient company....i say probably every big company will have a certain amount of waste....are you going to argue that?....

 

[francoHFW]

ACA, again, doesn't take over health care, only sets up transparent competitiion and outlaws Pub crony scams in the most inefficient, overpriced, ruinous segment of our economy. And it's the PUB PLAN. Hater dupes!!

 

[rdean]

Most of them.

brilliant reply, swallow. Got any examples?

providing clean water to drink
keeping the peace
sending out Social Security checks
reducing workplace injuries
ensuring aircraft safety
feeding the hungry
putting out fires
protecting consumers
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up)
vaccines
interstate highway system
GI Bill
Telephone infrastructure
Funding railroads
centers for disease control
human genome project
employee rights
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban)
FAA
National weather service
and on
and on
and on..................

The problem with these right wingernut dipshits is they actually believe all that bullshit. They stand on the soapbox of ignorance and say "prove it". And it's so easy. Because stupid doesn't think. It doesn't need to. Because in it's own deluded mind, it's always right.

 

[Iceweasel]

read the dam thread Bri.....Redfish is basically saying if you have any waste at all you aint an efficient company....i say probably every big company will have a certain amount of waste....are you going to argue that?....

Waste always occurs, you can only try to minimize it. Private companies strive to reduce it, for public services, it means you get a reduction in your budget if you can operate more efficiently. The emphasis in government is to cry poor an demand more to demonstrate how you are functioning under budgeted.

 

[bripat9643]

Most of them.

brilliant reply, swallow. Got any examples?

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]
and on
and on
and on..................

The problem with these right wingernut dipshits is they actually believe all that bullshit. They stand on the soapbox of ignorance and say "prove it". And it's so easy. Because stupid doesn't think. It doesn't need to. Because in it's own deluded mind, it's always right.

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]

The question is what does the government do efficiently. You obviously didn't get it.

 

[bripat9643]

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

lets see.....that every huge corporation has waste?....gee was it that tough to figure out?....

Yeah, so they have waste. So what?

read the dam thread Bri.....Redfish is basically saying if you have any waste at all you aint an efficient company....i say probably every big company will have a certain amount of waste....are you going to argue that?....

I haven't noticed him saying that. Can you provide a quote?

 

[Redfish]

no its not. every private business, large or small, has to operate efficently if it is to survive. The point is that the govt does not have to be efficient, and in fact never is.

i am willing to bet every huge corporation has waste.........all you can do is hope your managers around the Country and or World can minimize it as much as possible....

What's your point?

lets see.....that every huge corporation has waste?....gee was it that tough to figure out?....

Yeah, so they have waste. So what?

read the dam thread Bri.....Redfish is basically saying if you have any waste at all you aint an efficient company....i say probably every big company will have a certain amount of waste....are you going to argue that?....

the thread asks the question, what govt agency has ever operated efficiently? second question, why do you dems and libs want to turn your health over to the government?

Yes, there is some waste in private business, but they either minimize it or they go out of business----------thats the point, moron. Those rules do not apply to govt agencies.

 

[Redfish]

Most of them.

brilliant reply, swallow. Got any examples?

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]
and on
and on
and on..................

The problem with these right wingernut dipshits is they actually believe all that bullshit. They stand on the soapbox of ignorance and say "prove it". And it's so easy. Because stupid doesn't think. It doesn't need to. Because in it's own deluded mind, it's always right.

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]

The question is what does the government do efficiently. You obviously didn't get it.

they don't want to get it, because if they answer honestly it destroys their entire liberal fantasy.

 

[Sallow]

Most of them.

brilliant reply, swallow. Got any examples?

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]
and on
and on
and on..................

The problem with these right wingernut dipshits is they actually believe all that bullshit. They stand on the soapbox of ignorance and say "prove it". And it's so easy. Because stupid doesn't think. It doesn't need to. Because in it's own deluded mind, it's always right.

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]

The question is what does the government do efficiently. You obviously didn't get it.

Obviously you don't get it.

Efficiency at a private corporation means one thing.

Profit.

That's it.

They have no interest in the public good. None. Zero. Zip.

If it were possible to pay an employee nothing? That's what they would do.

If it were possible to package rat meat as beef? That's what they would do.

If it were possible to put swamp water into vials and call it "medicine"? That's what they would do.

It's historical fact.

We don't have millionaires and billionaires because of altruism. We have them because of greed.

And that's what motivates business. Not the public good.

 

[AmericanGirl05]

How are you defining efficiently? Is there a threshold in which you classify something as not efficient?

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

Using that definition, isn't the concept of "waste" a value judgement? I recognize that there is lots of resources, time and energy being put into the EPA, but I agree with the EPA's overall mission as an agency so therefore I don't view any of it as "waste"

Hey, I worked there for 22 years. Yes, I believe in the mission (not all the current tactics, mind you) but, trust me, there is waste there. Tons of it.

You know, they've had several scandals just this year.

 

[Redfish]

Most of them.

brilliant reply, swallow. Got any examples?

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]
and on
and on
and on..................

The problem with these right wingernut dipshits is they actually believe all that bullshit. They stand on the soapbox of ignorance and say "prove it". And it's so easy. Because stupid doesn't think. It doesn't need to. Because in it's own deluded mind, it's always right.

providing clean water to drink [nope] Private corporations do it cheaper
keeping the peace [nope]
sending out Social Security checks [nope]
reducing workplace injuries [nope]
ensuring aircraft safety [nope]
feeding the hungry [nope]
putting out fires [nope]
protecting consumers [nope]
regulating business (until Republicans fucked that up) [nope]
vaccines [nope]
interstate highway system [nope]
GI Bill [nope]
Telephone infrastructure [nope]
Funding railroads [nope]
centers for disease control [nope]
human genome project [nope]
employee rights [nope]
ban on leaded gas (lead in children's blood fell 37% in just a couple of years after the ban) [nope]
FAA [nope]
National weather service [nope]

The question is what does the government do efficiently. You obviously didn't get it.

Obviously you don't get it.

Efficiency at a private corporation means one thing.

Profit.

That's it.

They have no interest in the public good. None. Zero. Zip.

If it were possible to pay an employee nothing? That's what they would do.

If it were possible to package rat meat as beef? That's what they would do.

If it were possible to put swamp water into vials and call it "medicine"? That's what they would do.

It's historical fact.

We don't have millionaires and billionaires because of altruism. We have them because of greed.

And that's what motivates business. Not the public good.

Success and greed are not the same thing. One can be successful without being greedy. A company can be successful without taking advantage of its employees and customers. In fact the truth is that greedy corporations and people are rarely successful. Greed leads to corruption and corruption leads to failure and jail time----------can you say Madoff and Rostenkowski and Blogo and Abramoff?

 

[AmericanGirl05]

How are you defining efficiently? Is there a threshold in which you classify something as not efficient?

according to the dictionary. "capable of producing desired results without wasting materials, time, or energy.

Using that definition, isn't the concept of "waste" a value judgement? I recognize that there is lots of resources, time and energy being put into the EPA, but I agree with the EPA's overall mission as an agency so therefore I don't view any of it as "waste"

The EPA forces business to spend trillions of dollars every year to keep the environment clean. Most of that money is wasted because it only makes the difference between one part per billion of contamination and one part per ten billion. The difference has no noticeable impact on the environment or human health. The EPA's recent jihad against mercury emissions for coal fired power plants is a classic example. The true purpose of these regulations was to shut down coal fired power plants, not to clean up the environment.

I disagree. You might not have been around in the 50s and 60s, as I was, but the air and water were dirtier. If, like me, you are originally from a coal and steel town, you have seen your grandparents', parents' and now your generation with more cancer than in less polluted areas.