3 ms·
A what point do we consider it immoral for the government to consume 40% of GDP, given the catastrophically poor efficiency with which that money is spent? Tak
by d_burfoot 8y ago
A what point do we consider it immoral for the government to consume 40% of GDP, given the catastrophically poor efficiency with which that money is spent?
Take a look at the homelessness, trash- and isht-strewn streets of San Francisco. Then observe that SF is one of the richest cities in the world, with a ten billion dollar budget for a population of less than one million - more than ten thousand dollars per person. How can we accept this tragicomic failure?
- marnett 8y agoI think plenty of people would consider that. Granted, naming the city that generates most of that wealth from the very people that work for the companies in question probably isn't the best example. The tech billionaires are the most important constituents of SF. Governments are, at least in theory, accountable to the masses if an issue is collectively pushed for. I'd rather rely on that accountability than the altruism of the elite.
- PopsiclePete 8y agoSince when is "Government efficiency" supposed to be such an important goal in itself? Let me guess - "It should be run like a corporation!" No, it really, really shouldn't.
- chrisdhoover 8y agoThere is corporate corruption that periodically gets regulated and a few corrupt people are thrown in jail as an example. Then there is government corruption which is unbounded by regulation. Occasionaly you get Leland Yee who ventured out of government corruption and into out right mafia crime but for the most part politians stay in their lanes and reap the bennies of corruption.