5 ms·

That is a straw man, and an ugly one at that. Every system has inefficiencies, including the government. The fallacy is to assume that businesses inherently h

That is a straw man, and an ugly one at that. Every system has inefficiencies, including the government. The fallacy is to assume that businesses inherently have less inefficiencies than government and/or that a government’s cost/benefit equation improves if it’s run as a business. Often, their functions overlap and this can be the case. Automated traffic monitoring is cheaper than having people count cars. But beware privatization that promises efficiency and lower costs—the result is almost always worse services, maintainable debt and in time a government bailout. Often, their functions do not overlap. The purpose of social security is not to tighten spending as much as possible, it is to improve quality of life as much as possible.

refurb 2y ago
Funny you'd accuse me of a straw man then go on about claims I never made. Nothing has changed yet. No plans have been rolled out. We could wait and see what the plan is before claiming it's a failure already?
- Arn_Thor 2y ago
  Let me quote you: "Are you suggesting there is no possible way to make the government more efficient in a way that reduces costs by some significant amount?" The poster said no such thing.
  - refurb 2y ago
    The poster said "DOGE is BS". DOGE is looking to make the government more efficient, so the poster said "making the government more efficient is BS". Thus my question seems like a pretty good rephrasing.
    - psb217 2y ago
      If someone says: "I'm not a big fan of football", they're not necessarily saying: "We should kill all football players." If someone says: "I think DOGE is BS", they're not saying: "I think any and all efforts to improve goverment efficiency are BS." Sometimes, the thing a person says is the thing they mean to say. You're clearly creating a strawman.
      - refurb 2y ago
        But DOGE is basically “make government more efficient”, so they are interchangeable. Trying to give an analogy like “i don’t like football” and “we should kill all football players” for my statement is pretty disingenuous and a massive strawman itself.
        Arn_Thor 2y ago
        We’re trying to explain to you that they’re NOT interchangeable. What you’re doing is applying a false syllogism, but in question form. Let me illustrate with an example in a statement form: “A rock can’t fly. You can’t fly, therefore you are a rock”. You’re saying “A wants to do X. You are criticizing A, so you must object to X being done.” That is making an unjustified leap to your conclusion. It doesn’t matter what the subject is, this is a logic error.
        refurb 2y ago
        You’ve done a terrible job explaining why they are different. The very definition of DOGE is government efficiency. So please explain why a team focused on efficiency is not the same as a focus o. government efficiency.
        lazyasciiart 2y ago
        And the definition of DPRK is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, yet people frequently suggest that North Korea is not a democratic place.
dead_gunslinger 2y ago
[dead]
- Arn_Thor 2y ago
  Except in many, if not most, cases a company’s inefficiencies IS your problem. The perfectly informed rational consumer doesn’t exist. We’re forced to buy what’s on the shelves that we can afford, and the water in the pipes and power on the grid. When the businesses collude and price fix and lower the quality of your goods you DO suffer and your only recourse is regulation. And get out of here with that libertarian “services I don’t use” nonsense.
  - dead_gunslinger 2y ago
    [dead]
- JumpinJack_Cash 2y ago
  IF you spent a bit of time analyzing your statement you'd realize that the Government doesn't just take money but also give it out. And not just to employees and benefit receivers but also entrepreneurs and companies. It's by far the largest single economic actor and statistically speaking given the size of such a large actor it is more likely than not you ended up breaking even as far as quality of life (QOL) when considering all your transactions (in money and services) with the Government. Given the economic growth measured by GDP in the period 2000-2024 even more likely is that you ended up ahead.
  - dead_gunslinger 2y ago
    [dead]

refurb 2y ago

Funny you'd accuse me of a straw man then go on about claims I never made. Nothing has changed yet. No plans have been rolled out. We could wait and see what the plan is before claiming it's a failure already?

Arn_Thor 2y ago
Let me quote you: "Are you suggesting there is no possible way to make the government more efficient in a way that reduces costs by some significant amount?" The poster said no such thing.
- refurb 2y ago
  The poster said "DOGE is BS". DOGE is looking to make the government more efficient, so the poster said "making the government more efficient is BS". Thus my question seems like a pretty good rephrasing.
  - psb217 2y ago
    If someone says: "I'm not a big fan of football", they're not necessarily saying: "We should kill all football players." If someone says: "I think DOGE is BS", they're not saying: "I think any and all efforts to improve goverment efficiency are BS." Sometimes, the thing a person says is the thing they mean to say. You're clearly creating a strawman.
    - refurb 2y ago
      But DOGE is basically “make government more efficient”, so they are interchangeable. Trying to give an analogy like “i don’t like football” and “we should kill all football players” for my statement is pretty disingenuous and a massive strawman itself.
      - Arn_Thor 2y ago
        We’re trying to explain to you that they’re NOT interchangeable. What you’re doing is applying a false syllogism, but in question form. Let me illustrate with an example in a statement form: “A rock can’t fly. You can’t fly, therefore you are a rock”. You’re saying “A wants to do X. You are criticizing A, so you must object to X being done.” That is making an unjustified leap to your conclusion. It doesn’t matter what the subject is, this is a logic error.
        refurb 2y ago
        You’ve done a terrible job explaining why they are different. The very definition of DOGE is government efficiency. So please explain why a team focused on efficiency is not the same as a focus o. government efficiency.
        lazyasciiart 2y ago
        And the definition of DPRK is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, yet people frequently suggest that North Korea is not a democratic place.

dead_gunslinger 2y ago

[dead]

Arn_Thor 2y ago
Except in many, if not most, cases a company’s inefficiencies IS your problem. The perfectly informed rational consumer doesn’t exist. We’re forced to buy what’s on the shelves that we can afford, and the water in the pipes and power on the grid. When the businesses collude and price fix and lower the quality of your goods you DO suffer and your only recourse is regulation. And get out of here with that libertarian “services I don’t use” nonsense.
- dead_gunslinger 2y ago
  [dead]
JumpinJack_Cash 2y ago
IF you spent a bit of time analyzing your statement you'd realize that the Government doesn't just take money but also give it out. And not just to employees and benefit receivers but also entrepreneurs and companies. It's by far the largest single economic actor and statistically speaking given the size of such a large actor it is more likely than not you ended up breaking even as far as quality of life (QOL) when considering all your transactions (in money and services) with the Government. Given the economic growth measured by GDP in the period 2000-2024 even more likely is that you ended up ahead.
- dead_gunslinger 2y ago
  [dead]