Why government workers are fairly paid

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

On the other hand, businesses have a choice of raising prices or increasing efficiencies to keep costs down, or some combination of both, in a competitive market. In the public sector, we can opt to print money, raise taxes or go deeper in debt, but the choice of managing to increase efficiencies and / or do away with redundant services or agencies is almost never considered or acted upon.

Raising prices to keep costs down? That's a new one on me.

Efficiently managing a particular government agency/enterprise vs. the existence of redundant services/agencies are really two separate issues IMHO. The former is an internal issue (that of agency/enterprise), the latter a political issue. Blaming government workers who work in seemingly redundant agencies is missing the point IMHO (point being that it's Congress' fault, not the agencies or workers therein). Similarly, Congress unnecessarily supported building redundant F-35 engines by private sector firms (Pratt&Whitney, GE/Rolls Royce). How efficient was that?

And if the private sector is so damn efficient, why are all the government subsidies necessary for Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Ag, etc.? The GOP doesn't seem to be all that hot about shit-canning these unnecessary expenditures, just picking on their latest boogeyman (the public sector worker). It just the latest in a long line (Blacks, Gays, Muslims, Immigrants, etc.) in the GOP politics of resentment. Once they alienate everybody, they'll simply become the party of angry rednecks (see recent post on brainstorm proclamation by a GOP politician from SC).

[whell]

Lets try it again, this time with punctuation

On the other hand, businesses have a choice of raising prices, or increasing efficiencies to keep costs down, or some combination of both, in a competitive market.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Raising prices to keep costs down? That's a new one on me.

Efficiently managing a particular government agency/enterprise vs. the existence of redundant services/agencies are really two separate issues IMHO. The former is an internal issue (that of agency/enterprise), the latter a political issue. Blaming government workers who work in seemingly redundant agencies is missing the point IMHO (point being that it's Congress' fault, not the agencies or workers therein). Similarly, Congress unnecessarily supported building redundant F-35 engines by private sector firms (Pratt&Whitney, GE/Rolls Royce). How efficient was that?

And if the private sector is so damn efficient, why are all the government subsidies necessary for Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Ag, etc.? The GOP doesn't seem to be all that hot about shit-canning these unnecessary expenditures, just picking on their latest boogeyman (the public sector worker). It just the latest in a long line (Blacks, Gays, Muslims, Immigrants, etc.) in the GOP politics of resentment. Once they alienate everybody, they'll simply become the party of angry rednecks (see recent post on brainstorm proclamation by a GOP politician from SC).

First, I'll defend Whell (as if he were not completely capable of doing so on his own). It seems that the three options he laid out were 1) increasing prices 2) lowering costs by increasing efficiencies, or 3) a combination of 1 and 2. I think you just forgot your smiley, Finn.

Next, Finn, your second and third paragraphs are dead on. Therefore, I'll concur in part in your opinion.

Regards,

D-Ray

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Efficiently managing a particular government agency/enterprise vs. the existence of redundant services/agencies are really two separate issues IMHO. The former is an internal issue (that of agency/enterprise), the latter a political issue. Blaming government workers who work in seemingly redundant agencies is missing the point IMHO (point being that it's Congress' fault, not the agencies or workers therein). Similarly, Congress unnecessarily supported building redundant F-35 engines by private sector
firms (Pratt&Whitney, GE/Rolls Royce). How efficient was that?

This may be making my point. Pratt&Whitney, GE/Rolls Royce don't (or potentially shouldn't) give a crap about the fiscal stability of government as long as the contracts keep coming. If politicians make a political calculation to keep work in their districts, versus cutting jobs which may cut votes, that maximizes political gain but is damned inefficient with the dollars spent on compensation (and taxes). However, left to their own devices, if it were only up to Lockheed Martin to pick the winners and losers in their supply chain based on quality, cost and ability to deliver, it would likely be a non-issue with a single supplier providing the engines.

Originally Posted by finnbow

And if the private sector is so damn efficient, why are all the government subsidies necessary for Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Ag, etc.? The GOP doesn't seem to be all that hot about shit-canning these unnecessary expenditures, just picking on their latest boogeyman (the public sector worker). It just the latest in a long line (Blacks, Gays, Muslims, Immigrants, etc.) in the GOP politics of resentment. Once they alienate everybody, they'll simply become the party of angry rednecks (see recent post on brainstorm proclamation by a GOP politician from SC).

Politics is about boogeymen Look at your own post: "Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Ag, etc., party of angry rednecks."

Now, for what its worth, I'm all for cutting all subsidies and tax breaks to business. One central reform that is necessary is reform of our tax policy, which is more about directing behavior than it is funding the essential operations of government.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

On the other hand, businesses have a choice of raising prices or increasing efficiencies to keep costs down, or some combination of both, in a competitive market. In the public sector, we can opt to print money, raise taxes or go deeper in debt, but the choice of managing to increase efficiencies and / or do away with redundant services or agencies is almost never considered or acted upon.

You mean like the C-17s that the airforce did not want, but Congress authorized anyway? Or the F-35 fighters that we don't need, never mind an extra engine. Or two new aircraft carriers currently under construction that will be obsolete before they even get launched. When it comes to wasting money nobody does it like the Pentagon. And I sure know about those guys, there was a time when my car knew its own way to Fort Monmouth.

Both parties are equally guilty, look at the howls of anguish during base closings, or when Gates wanted to shut down that useless tri-partite committee in VA.

[merrylander]

Steve Pearlstein had a good column on how business is bribing (oops , lobbying) like mad to kill asll regulation and with Robert's Corporate Court they will likely get what they want. I will never buy anyting from Apple, Jobs is a traitor IMHO.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Politics is about boogeymen Look at your own post: "Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Ag, etc., party of angry rednecks."

Now, for what its worth, I'm all for cutting all subsidies and tax breaks to business. One central reform that is necessary is reform of our tax policy, which is more about directing behavior than it is funding the essential operations of government.

I wasn't creating boogeyman out of Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Ag - just describing them in familiar terms and casting fault at Congress' fealty to them at taxpayers' expense. As for rednecks, I'm simply quoting the referenced SC Republican who said that the GOP would suffer a huge "void" without rednecks. It's becoming more true day by day as the GOP continues its policies of alienating blacks, gays, Muslims, gov't. workers, etc.

I'm in absolute and unequivocal agreement with your criticism of our tax code. It's an abomination and a national embarrassment.

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Both parties are equally guilty, look at the howls of anguish during base closings, or when Gates wanted to shut down that useless tri-partite committee in VA.

You asked earlier for links about how wage dollars are spent inefficiently by the gov't, but I think you've cites some reasonable examples.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You asked earlier for links about how wage dollars are spent inefficiently by the gov't, but I think you've cites some reasonable examples.

The trouble is that the accusations about inefficient government come from GOP politicians for the most part. They, far more than the Executive Branch itself, are the source of such inefficient government spending. That's what so galling about hearing the GOP rail on about such issues while steadfastly defending all DoD expenditures, oil subsidies, etc.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

You asked earlier for links about how wage dollars are spent inefficiently by the gov't, but I think you've cites some reasonable examples.

The examples given discussed contracting functions to private enterprise and how much of a sacred cow defense spending is. I really didn't see any example of overpaid public workers. Indeed, most of what I have seen is how much private industry is firmly attached to the government teat.

Regards,

D-ray