Re: public and private expense

[Briana LeClaire <mmsmom1@yahoo.com>]

Hello Lou et al!

Actually, most first-class passengers are there with frequent flyer
miles/upgrades, or else they are airline employees travelling for
free.  (Before our daughter was born I worked for an airline.)

Let's see . . . for the record, I am NOT a libertarian -- just wanted
to get that out of the way.  And, I do think there are two or three
appropriate roles for gov't, such as police and military (providing
for the common defense.)  The interstate highway system is nice --
toll roads are a pain.

Yes, the gov't IS we, thank you for correcting me!  Have you ever read
P.J. O'Rourke's "Parliament of Whores"?  Pretty foul language
occasionally, but the last chapter is especially enlightening & I
think you'd enjoy it.

I disagree with you about campaign finance reform.  Cutting off
dollars cuts off speech.  Personally, I am a term-limits fan.

$40 million?  Sheesh.  A little bit more and we'd be talking real money.

:-)  Briana


Lou Sternberg  wrote:
>
> This is from a related topic (the Moscow pool), but the response is
really
> about public vs. private expense, so here goes:
> 
> Briana wrote (and I think some others concur):
> > government generally
> >does MORE than necessary on any given project (road, swimming pool,
> >outhouse, whatever) if given the opportunity.  It does what IT wants
> >to do. 
> >The private sector, on the other hand, does what is demanded of it. 
> >If it (a store, a contractor, a school, etc.) doesn't, it dies.
> 
> As I read it, the preceding explains why the private sector is more
cost
> effective than the public sector.  
> 
> Is the private sector more cost effective?
> 
> 1.  The price that the city of Moscow pays for a law enforcement
officer,
> for example, is far less than the price one would pay to obtain
equivalent
> services in the private sector.
> 
> 2.  I doubt that the public administrative price of processing a
piece of
> paperwork is less than than incurred in the private sector.  I
doubt, too,
> that the private sector could operate an equivalent lending library
system
> for less than that expended by Latah County.  Although one could
argue that
> libraries are a waste of public funds since they do not generate
offsetting
> revenue.  Thank goodness for state lotteries? 
> 
> 3.  The public sector is able to obtain valuable professional
expertise at
> little or no cost to taxtpayers (e.g., the P&Z Commission).  
> 
> The public sector, however, has often been unable to obtain cost
effective
> services from the private sector.  Remember -- the public sector
rarely
> builds roadways, swimming pools, monuments, schools, military
equipment,
> etc.  They contract with the private sector for these services.  And
often
> the cost of services seems exorbitant.  [I am still awed by the fact
that a
> recently constructed I-84 overpass and access at Cole Road in Boise
cost $40
> million.  A single interstate juncture!]  
> 
> My easy answer is that we need campaign financing reform -- as long as
> business funds the political process, they will continue to reap the
rewards
> from the procurement process.  The more difficult answer involves the
> increase in public sector savvy at procurring goods and services
from the
> private sector.  It is definitely necessary.  The federal government
> provides some good examples -- although their efforts often involve
two
> steps forward (competitive bidding requirements) and one step backward
> (increased administrative costs due to rigid bureaucratic procurement
> procedures). 
> 
> I would also like to add that I reject the notion that the private
sector is
> more effecient simply because it responds more directly to the public
> wishes.  Come visit me in Boise, and we will take a survey of the
first
> class passengers arriving and departing at the Boise Airport.  I will
> guarantee you that the majority of first class tickets are paid for
out of
> private sector funds, and not out of public sector funds.  (Phil
Batt flies
> coach -- need I say more?)  And is this because the public is
demanding that
> the suppliers of their goods and services feel luxurious, or is it
simply
> because many competitors in the private sector are able to pass on
their
> non-essential costs to their consumers? 
> 
> Finally, I would like to note that government is not an "IT" that
does what
> is wants.  To paraphrase Pogo, IT is WE.
> 
> Peace, 
> 
> Lou
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Lou Sternberg, Ph.D.             (208)343-0555
> 5017 Bel Air                     loustern@primenet.com
> Boise ID 83705-2777
> 
> 

==
:-) Briana



_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com