3 ms·
This seems weird, if we're talking about the same definition of efficiency, which I would say is the resources, denominated in money, needed to produce a given
by aetherson 8y ago
This seems weird, if we're talking about the same definition of efficiency, which I would say is the resources, denominated in money, needed to produce a given result.
So let's say that the government produces one driver's license per $100, and I'm angry that it costs that much. Your proposal is that I will be happy if I instead spend $120 per license?
- codyb 8y agoI have a feeling when someone said "have you been to the dmv" they were talking about the length of time things take, not the monetary costs associated with producing a license. In that case the GP would be talking about appropriating more money for more DMV employees so that people could be done with their business their more expeditiously. In your case, you're talking about monetary efficiency which is a different thing and might be better served by less employees serving the people. And I guess it's up to society to decide where that line should be drawn in terms of both monetary efficiency for the tax payer and temporal efficiency for the person waiting in line.
- aetherson 8y agoI agree that when people talk about the DMV, they're most likely talking about the lines. When people talk about government inefficiency in nearly every other context, they're talking about money.