4 ms·

If the government was a dynamic work environment, it would burn just as much money. But instead of saying "the project went over budget", they'd say "we execute

If the government was a dynamic work environment, it would burn just as much money. But instead of saying "the project went over budget", they'd say "we executed a strategic pivot." Instead of employees "stagnating", employees would launch all sorts of initiatives and then abandon them after getting promoted. Instead of maintaining legacy systems for decades, teams would turn down systems so that employees can work on shinier greenfield projects, leaving users in the lurch. I do not oppose government efficiency. I support reforms to identify and eliminate waste in government. Unfortunately that's not what DOGE is doing.

mrcsharp 2y ago
> But instead of saying "the project went over budget", they'd say "we executed a strategic pivot." Yeah, politicians already do this. They use different words but to the same effect. I am not going to pretend I have the ultimate solution to all of this, but the idea that government employees get to sit there, do bare minimum for the entirety of their careers, and without any desire to improve anything for the sake of the people they serve (because clearly they forgot they work for the citizens of the country in which said government operates) is just so wrong. Maybe we deserve to live in mediocrity. You can, at least, vote out a congress, house, or a parliament member if they are mediocre and not doing much (doesn't always happen but the option exists). Government employees are un-elected (technically) and get to spend their entire life in a "stable" job regardless of their performance. Is this status quo actually good for the country?
- kweingar 2y ago
  If you want private sector work ethic, you gotta pay private sector salaries. (Many federal employees have a better work ethic than the average private sector worker. But you can't make that an expectation if you're paying less than they could make elsewhere.)

mrcsharp 2y ago

> But instead of saying "the project went over budget", they'd say "we executed a strategic pivot." Yeah, politicians already do this. They use different words but to the same effect. I am not going to pretend I have the ultimate solution to all of this, but the idea that government employees get to sit there, do bare minimum for the entirety of their careers, and without any desire to improve anything for the sake of the people they serve (because clearly they forgot they work for the citizens of the country in which said government operates) is just so wrong. Maybe we deserve to live in mediocrity. You can, at least, vote out a congress, house, or a parliament member if they are mediocre and not doing much (doesn't always happen but the option exists). Government employees are un-elected (technically) and get to spend their entire life in a "stable" job regardless of their performance. Is this status quo actually good for the country?

kweingar 2y ago
If you want private sector work ethic, you gotta pay private sector salaries. (Many federal employees have a better work ethic than the average private sector worker. But you can't make that an expectation if you're paying less than they could make elsewhere.)