3 ms·
If government doesn’t want to be replaced by corporations, then government has to not suck so hard.
by newsclues 1y ago
If government doesn’t want to be replaced by corporations, then government has to not suck so hard.
- jelder 1y agoWorst possible take. The government sucks _because_ of decades of slip into corporate control and manufactured consent.
- indoordin0saur 1y agoYour take and his take are not incompatible.
- newsclues 1y agoExactly. What is the solution? Is it more corporate controlled, incompetence in government? Or is it less government that is focused on core issues and building competency and trust?
- jelder 1y agoWorse punishments for bribery. Higher rewards and lower risks for reporting bribery. Whistleblower protections. Government isn't the problem here, it's the victim.
- QuadmasterXLII 1y agoRule of thumb: If a corporation mostly sells to consumers or other corporations, the government can save a lot of money and get a great result by buying from it at consumer prices. If a corporation mostly sells to the government, the government can steal every last taxpayer penny while delivering shit by buying from the corporation at government prices. See for example (and yes I’d get cancelled for pointing this out) govt purchasing from ULA vs govt purchasing from SpaceX
- rzerowan 1y agoAlso there is the result that from IP to service and support the Gov will get washed.Leading to a lack of expertise and ownership. It essentially becomes little more than a rental - not owned, serviced or extended unless at the whims of the lowest bidder .Who inevitable qccrues cost overruns.In the space examplein the 70-80s a gov department was arguable more competent/effecient and on spec within its given budget.Not so much now.
- JKCalhoun 1y agoThat's probably on us then.