4 ms·

This is indicative of a systemic culture of rule breaking. This is common in all government run systems. "The system is too arduous, doesn't reflect the 'real

This is indicative of a systemic culture of rule breaking. This is common in all government run systems. "The system is too arduous, doesn't reflect the 'real world.' We know better than the system, we know what really matters." Eventually you have a bunch of John Waynes playing fast and loose with the rules, eventually they become emboldened, and since the government is famously bad at policing itself, these attitudes are pervasive. This happens at the highest levels, even. Consider Hillary Clinton and the communication of classified (and information that should have been considered classified regardless of markings) via her primary email server. It's a pervasive culture of rule breaking.

m3h 6y ago
>This is common in all government run systems. I do not believe all government systems result in systemic rule breaking but only those do that do not provide an reasonable way to get things done within the rules/regulatory framework.
woodandsteel 6y ago
>This is common in all government run systems No, that is not at all true. There are lots of government run systems, like the health care systems in most developed countries, that are just fine. The problem with Pakistan is it has a highly corrupt culture in general and in government in particular. That is no doubt why so many of the airline pilots were able to get hired without a legal licence. Your general claim and the fact that you bring up Hillary Clinton as an example makes me think that you believe in the crackpot libertarian view that modern societies would be vastly better if we basically got rid of the government except for a few, narrow areas.
- linuxftw 6y ago
  > crackpot libertarian view that modern societies Which group, government or 'crackpot libertarians', were responsible for more deaths in the last century? I'll wait. I'm sure if you ask those in Iraq, they'd vastly prefer the US Government was more libertarian (or any NATO government, really). I understand wanting to trade blood for convenience, as long as it's not your blood.
  - woodandsteel 6y ago
    Oh dear, you are making the argument that if it is very bad to be wrong in one irrational way, that makes it just fine to be wrong in another irrational way. Wouldn't it be better to be just, you know, right?

m3h 6y ago

>This is common in all government run systems. I do not believe all government systems result in systemic rule breaking but only those do that do not provide an reasonable way to get things done within the rules/regulatory framework.

woodandsteel 6y ago

>This is common in all government run systems No, that is not at all true. There are lots of government run systems, like the health care systems in most developed countries, that are just fine. The problem with Pakistan is it has a highly corrupt culture in general and in government in particular. That is no doubt why so many of the airline pilots were able to get hired without a legal licence. Your general claim and the fact that you bring up Hillary Clinton as an example makes me think that you believe in the crackpot libertarian view that modern societies would be vastly better if we basically got rid of the government except for a few, narrow areas.

linuxftw 6y ago
> crackpot libertarian view that modern societies Which group, government or 'crackpot libertarians', were responsible for more deaths in the last century? I'll wait. I'm sure if you ask those in Iraq, they'd vastly prefer the US Government was more libertarian (or any NATO government, really). I understand wanting to trade blood for convenience, as long as it's not your blood.
- woodandsteel 6y ago
  Oh dear, you are making the argument that if it is very bad to be wrong in one irrational way, that makes it just fine to be wrong in another irrational way. Wouldn't it be better to be just, you know, right?