3 ms·
That of course assumes that the money needed provide the same services for the people grows at the same rate as the population growth. In other words, the cost
by harshpotatoes 16y ago
That of course assumes that the money needed provide the same services for the people grows at the same rate as the population growth. In other words, the cost per person might actually be significantly lower to provide services for 1million people than it would be to provide services for 20 million people. And maybe this isn't due to a government 'inefficiency' (mismanagement of funds), but rather an inefficiency that is inherent in the design of our cities and services (Meaning: Long term problem requiring redesign of many services in order to increase spending efficiency).
So really, I think it's far more important to question:
1) How has the cost for these public services scaled with the population in the past?
2) Based on that, how do I think the cost of the these public services scale with the population in the foreseeable future?
3) Is this increase in expenditure due to wasteful mismanagement of funds, or a design problem in our cities and services?