Is there anything that the Government does better than the Private Sector?

I ask this question because I honestly can't think of anything. I do realize there is a need for Government and I'm very happy for some of the things that the Government provides. Such as... our Military and Police force(although many of the laws are ridiculous and cost tax payers a fortune). I also really enjoy Public Libraries... which are usually pretty good depending on where you live.

I'm not an anarchist(I'm a Libertarian) and like I said I do realize there is a need for Government. But every time I think of something that the Government does that the Private Sector also does the Government virtually always does it worse. I'm sure there are some things that the Government does better than the Private Sector but I honestly can't think of any. If you can think of anything... please post it in this thread.

gives more free money to gangbanging moochers?

why are you very happy for the military? they have never provided any defense for a single attack on our soil. what did they do to stop pearl harbor and 9/11? all our military really does is be pawns on the grand chessboard and get us hated by the rest of the world. and please don't give me the b.s. that we have to attack people to keep ourself safe. we are surrounded by thousands of miles of oceans and have the world's largest military in terms of technology and $ spent. no country (especially ones like afghanistan/pakistan/iraq/iran/libya with no air force or navy) has the slightest intention of threatening or attacking us.

if you were a true libertarian you would not want to keep spending trillions of dollars we don't have to blow up sand and make the rich richer.

no, not a single thing

Mike, I usually agree with you 110% but this is where I draw the line. Iran is coming after us a long as we continue to aid Israel...As far as what the US forces have done to stop an attack here in the US, i don't think you or any of us chumps really know. I doubt this government tells us 10% of the threats and attacks they were stopped. With that being said I agree that we spend way to much fighting over there...but you're damned if you do and damned if ya dont know ya know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milwaukee mike

why are you very happy for the military? they have never provided any defense for a single attack on our soil. what did they do to stop pearl harbor and 9/11? all our military really does is be pawns on the grand chessboard and get us hated by the rest of the world. and please don't give me the b.s. that we have to attack people to keep ourself safe. we are surrounded by thousands of miles of oceans and have the world's largest military in terms of technology and $ spent. no country (especially ones like afghanistan/pakistan/iraq/iran/libya with no air force or navy) has the slightest intention of threatening or attacking us. if you were a true libertarian you would not want to keep spending trillions of dollars we don't have to blow up sand and make the rich richer.

---

I agree with you. Perhaps I didn't word it correctly... what I mean is... I'm just glad that we have a Military and most countries know that we have a good one. I don't think we should be the Military police of the world though.

Maybe corruption... maybe :+clueless

Not much bang for the taxpayer buck by letting the government run things. Big budgets, major waste.

My father was a federal civilian employee at DND. It's unbelievable the amount of waste in that department.

The shitty job the government has been doing running everything is becoming much more apparent when their endless supply of funds has dried up. In the past when they incurred a problem they just threw money at it until it would resurface then they would just reach into the well and throw more money at it. The well is empty and if you couldn't tell before it is very easily noticeable that the way the government has been running things is not sustainable long term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blissit02

Mike, I usually agree with you 110% but this is where I draw the line. Iran is coming after us a long as we continue to aid Israel...As far as what the US forces have done to stop an attack here in the US, i don't think you or any of us chumps really know. I doubt this government tells us 10% of the threats and attacks they were stopped. With that being said I agree that we spend way to much fighting over there...but you're damned if you do and damned if ya dont know ya know

---

the government uses any and all threats no matter how miniscule to scare the public. the government always wants additional spending and in facts makes up threats just to attack people.

iran has never threatened anyone, they have no capacity to come thousands of miles across oceans. what are they going to do, swim here with rocket launchers on their backs?

iraq never had weapons of mass destruction, yet the propaganda machine kept forcing it down our throats. iran doesn't have a single nuclear weapon or any intentions of getting them, yet again we are hearing it nonstop.

there is only ONE COUNTRY in the middle east with nuclear weapons, and that's israel - for some funny reason they never get mentioned as a threat even though they own all our ports. they also have the #1 lobby in washington and have had dozens of people from aipac arrested for spying and stealing u.s. government secrets. they also have their dual citizens in every major office.

if the head of our homeland security was a dual citizen of iran how would you feel? yet we have been conditioned to not care that he is a dual citizen of israel.
believe me i spent the better part of my life believing the bullshit on the evening news, then i finally woke up and realized everything we are being told is for a reason and it's not to educate or enlighten.
:cheers:

The US has not backed our money with something tangible since 71. If people stopped buying our debt we would collapse and bring the world down with us. If young people used social media to organize and stop paying into the ponzi scheme social security, the whole thing would collapse. It is doomed for collapse. It is not something we can work out of. Obama keeps saying "the most productive workers". Like we could really work out of it. Each US citizen owes 175,000 at least (might be more). After Japan goes down (unavoidable debt 200% their GDP), Europe will fall, then likely the US (because no one will buy the debt, and then China soon after. Everthing is connected. Almost everyone has "bad" debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salmon Steak

The US has not backed our money with something tangible since 71. If people stopped buying out debt we would collapse and bring the world down with us. If young people used social media to organize and stop paying into the ponzi scheme social security, the whole thing would collapse. It is doomed for collapse. It is not something we can work out of. Obama keeps saying "the most productive workers". Like we could really work out of it. Each US citizen owes 175,000 at least (might be more). After Japan goes down (unavoidable debt 200% their GDP), Europe will fall, then likely the US (because no one will buy the debt, and then China soon after. Everthing is connected. Almost everyone has "bad" debt.

---

so what do we do then?

i agree there is no way this can ever be fixed now that we're 15 trillion in the hole not counting s.s. and medicare. people think the u.s. can "print more money" but it's the federal reserve that prints money, so that just puts the u.s. even further in debt.

Deliver water to CA

back to the original question though, i think almost all police and firefighting are better done by the government. structurally it seems to make the most sense, someone probably doesn't want to get arrested and thrown in jail by a private contractor - even though a lot of jails are owned by corporations it's assumed that they are public which probably cuts down on backlash.

education we could probably argue on all night. post office is probably cheaper than fedex/ups would be for small letters even if they had all the business.

best function of government is probably to give the illusion of protection. without that there would be a major potential for anarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milwaukee mike

so what do we do then?

i agree there is no way this can ever be fixed now that we're 15 trillion in the hole not counting s.s. and medicare. people think the u.s. can "print more money" but it's the federal reserve that prints money, so that just puts the u.s. even further in debt.

---

I hope it does not happen mike. If it does, try to imagine what the world will be like without cash to buy things. Might have to trade for things. Buy those things maybe. China will probably push for an international currency in a few years (already trade with Russia without the US dollar as the standard). Germany will not be able to bail everyone out. I don't have the answers. Pray like you need a backdoor cover.

healthcare obviously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milwaukee mike

the government uses any and all threats no matter how miniscule to scare the public. the government always wants additional spending and in facts makes up threats just to attack people.

iran has never threatened anyone, they have no capacity to come thousands of miles across oceans. what are they going to do, swim here with rocket launchers on their backs?

iraq never had weapons of mass destruction, yet the propaganda machine kept forcing it down our throats. iran doesn't have a single nuclear weapon or any intentions of getting them, yet again we are hearing it nonstop.

there is only ONE COUNTRY in the middle east with nuclear weapons, and that's israel - for some funny reason they never get mentioned as a threat even though they own all our ports. they also have the #1 lobby in washington and have had dozens of people from aipac arrested for spying and stealing u.s. government secrets. they also have their dual citizens in every major office.

if the head of our homeland security was a dual citizen of iran how would you feel? yet we have been conditioned to not care that he is a dual citizen of israel.
believe me i spent the better part of my life believing the bullshit on the evening news, then i finally woke up and realized everything we are being told is for a reason and it's not to educate or enlighten.
:cheers:

---

I agree 110% on Israel.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blissit02

I agree 110% on Israel.....

---

but again what can we do about it? seems as though the mainstream media won't let anyone comment on anything anti-israel or anti-jewish calling it "anti-semitism" or "racist".

even when the atlanta jewish times ran a story a couple weeks ago that got a huge backlash in israel (the editor suggested that mossad should kill obama with their agents in the u.s. if he got out of line) our media was silent.

so someone can talk about killing a u.s. president in a u.s. paper as long as they're loyal to israel? i might not agree with everything obama does but he's our president and any threat made against him by any person or group should be taken seriously and result in criminal charges.
:cheers:

Infrastructure-Private sector doesn't fund projects like suspension bridges, tunnels, the interstate highway system, subways, the Hoover Dam.
NASA-like Mitt Romney said (paraphrased) if someone brought that project to me (going to the moon) I'd say you're fired!

I heard there are some really gifted hexi/versi playing government employees :cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCentaur

I heard there are some really gifted hexi/versi playing government employees :cheers:

---

I can't beat my wife at Connect 4 to save my life :cheeleade:lmao:

u.s.a. made money selling weapons to europe during WWII. military industrial complex is a big force. u.s.a. has been a giant weapons producer and military spender, it's what we do. the military wants a few conflicts now and then to justify it's enourmous existance. it needs to slow down imo.

NO.

And there's a reason for that.

Gov't work attracts a certain type of individual. The type of individuals who become basketball referees instead of basketball players. The type of people who learn every inch of the rulebook backwards and forwards but never learn why those rules were written in the first place.

Gov't creates bureaucrats. And bureaucrats are good for nothing other than saving their own skin. They don't take risks and they don't think with any semblance of creativity or ingenuity. Just do what their superiors tell them. And all bureaucratic superiors want is a bigger budget to control so their annual salary increases. And the easiest way for them to do that is not to figure out how to get more people through the DMV line faster. It's not to make sure your mail gets delivered more reliably. It's to fund some special interest group to lobby on their behalf and how their gov't program is a necessity.

In short, gov't is less efficient than the private sector because in gov't, one's output don't matter as long as you follow the rule book. In gov't work, you are successful as long as your budget isn't taken away. It doesn't matter how much money you waste, as long as you can convince the taxpayer it's waste worth funding.

Needless to say, things don't work this way in the open market place. As Dr. Raymond Stanz once put it, "You've never worked in the private sector, they expect results!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCentaur

I heard there are some really gifted hexi/versi playing government employees :cheers:

---

:lmao:I should give a seminar to every politician on the planet that is based on the way that I play Hexversi. The seminar would be called... "What looks good immediately isn't necessarily good in the long run" Of course.... most politicians would likely respond with... "Who cares what's good in the long run? I want to get voted in!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milwaukee mike

why are you very happy for the military? they have never provided any defense for a single attack on our soil. what did they do to stop pearl harbor and 9/11? all our military really does is be pawns on the grand chessboard and get us hated by the rest of the world. and please don't give me the b.s. that we have to attack people to keep ourself safe. we are surrounded by thousands of miles of oceans and have the world's largest military in terms of technology and $ spent. no country (especially ones like afghanistan/pakistan/iraq/iran/libya with no air force or navy) has the slightest intention of threatening or attacking us.

if you were a true libertarian you would not want to keep spending trillions of dollars we don't have to blow up sand and make the rich richer.

---

Well as far as the boots on the ground for 9/11, prior to the create of Homeland Security and TSA the people who were checking your bags when you boarded an airplane were private sector contractors. While its not dispositive to say that the government is directly doing a better job since there hasn't been a similar attack since 9/11, I'd say that the private sector did a pretty piss poor job of stopping it once it was out of the planning stages.

Beyond that and more generally to the topic. There are numerous things that governments do that the private sector can't either do on the same scale or wouldn't do in the absence of the government. As another poster said, interstate highways are a big one, there just isn't the funding for them from the private sector because they are primarily driven by profits, not by the public good. Food inspection is another big one, left to their own devices the private sector would only check their food products in so much as it would cost them less to do so than the cost of lawsuits from tainted food products, they certainly most likely would not volunteer labeling information. Border protection is another one, who would patrol the borders if it was left to the private sector? The public sector provides licensing for a lot of things, which you might not agree is a good or bad thing, but chances are pretty good that if it was left to the private sector it would probably look much the same way as it does when done by the public sector.

Ultimate I guess my point is there are very few areas where there is overlap between what the government does and what the private sector does.

As far as Social Security is concerned, its not really as broken as people would lead you to believe. Its in need of real structural reform, but its not beyond repair. Same with Medicare. Social Security was running surpluses for a number of years due to there being more baby boomers working than retirees, and it probably would have paid for itself through a lot more of the baby boomer years had it not been raided to pay for other spending.

In fact of that 16 trillion dollar left that we have, almost 5 trillion of it is held by intragovernment agencies. That debt represents money we borrowed from ourselves, as of 2010, 2.5 trillion of it was money borrowed from the Social Security trust fund. That's really a bit off topic though.

Hey Galt, how about all you "producers" move to a faraway island in real life? It would be hilarious watching you argue over whose turn it is to actually work, and society would probably do much better with the reduction of a few hundred nihilistic sociopaths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blissit02

Mike, I usually agree with you 110% but this is where I draw the line. Iran is coming after us a long as we continue to aid Israel...As far as what the US forces have done to stop an attack here in the US, i don't think you or any of us chumps really know. I doubt this government tells us 10% of the threats and attacks they were stopped. With that being said I agree that we spend way to much fighting over there...but you're damned if you do and damned if ya dont know ya know

---

Jesus Christ you got to be one of the dumbest mfer's in this forum. If you don't like Iran why don't you go over there and do something about it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Madcap

NO.

And there's a reason for that.

Gov't work attracts a certain type of individual. The type of individuals who become basketball referees instead of basketball players. The type of people who learn every inch of the rulebook backwards and forwards but never learn why those rules were written in the first place.

Gov't creates bureaucrats. And bureaucrats are good for nothing other than saving their own skin. They don't take risks and they don't think with any semblance of creativity or ingenuity. Just do what their superiors tell them. And all bureaucratic superiors want is a bigger budget to control so their annual salary increases. And the easiest way for them to do that is not to figure out how to get more people through the DMV line faster. It's not to make sure your mail gets delivered more reliably. It's to fund some special interest group to lobby on their behalf and how their gov't program is a necessity.

In short, gov't is less efficient than the private sector because in gov't, one's output don't matter as long as you follow the rule book. In gov't work, you are successful as long as your budget isn't taken away. It doesn't matter how much money you waste, as long as you can convince the taxpayer it's waste worth funding.

Needless to say, things don't work this way in the open market place. As Dr. Raymond Stanz once put it, "You've never worked in the private sector, they expect results!"

---

I think you've hit the ultimate nail on the head of how the public perception of government work and actual government work are two completely different things. To your average person I bet when they think of a government worker they think of LaShanda at the DMV with acrylic nails who cops an attitude when you ask for service, much as when people think of the mythical welfare queen they think of some lady with 4 Cadillacs and 10 designer handbags, but I'm sorry to say LaShanda represents a minority of government workers, just as the welfare queen represents a minority of TANF recipients.

In the United States, at this time there are approximately 19 million local, state and federal government employees and another 5 million part-time local, state and federal employees out of a workforce of 154 million(this does not include members of the military). That means that 16% of the workforce works for the government in some capacity(outside of the 1.5 million in the armed forces and 1.5 million reservists who could be both government employees and reservists or in the private sector and reservists). Police, Firefighters, Teachers, Border Patrol Agents, Mayors, City Councilmen, Mail Carriers, Restaurant Inspectors, Customs Agents, University Professors(at Public Universities). Do you think most of these people suck at their jobs? Do you think that ~17% of the workforce is lazy or inefficient? Could 17% of the employed workforce not cut it in the private sector? What percentage do you think is fair. Are any of the above occupations I mentioned paid bureaucrats(well maybe the mayors, but they're elected by you the public)? What do you think the US would look if all of those people decided to quit doing their job tomorrow?

It's not a fare question because a lot of things would be different if only the private sector was involved. I would argue that a lot of industries would be better off if they were made non-for-profit (whether run by the government or not).
The fire department works fine, healthcare (in other countries it works just fine) postal service (it's still cheaper than the alternatives), schools (depending on which neighborhood of course), public transportation are just a few that come to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milwaukee mike

but again what can we do about it? seems as though the mainstream media won't let anyone comment on anything anti-israel or anti-jewish calling it "anti-semitism" or "racist".

even when the atlanta jewish times ran a story a couple weeks ago that got a huge backlash in israel (the editor suggested that mossad should kill obama with their agents in the u.s. if he got out of line) our media was silent.

so someone can talk about killing a u.s. president in a u.s. paper as long as they're loyal to israel? i might not agree with everything obama does but he's our president and any threat made against him by any person or group should be taken seriously and result in criminal charges.
:cheers:

---

This is something that bothers me with the conservative right. I identify with them on many issues but the blind support of Israel on FOX news and by many conservatives is a big turnoff. Whether it is the effect of some sort of guilt fed by Jewish media and WWII movies or if it has a religious basis, I find it very worrisome for the USA. SOrry flyingillini

BTW, being critical of Israel is not anti-semitic IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCentaur

This is something that bothers me with the conservative right. I identify with them on many issues but the blind support of Israel on FOX news and by many conservatives is a big turnoff. Whether it is the effect of some sort of guilt fed by Jewish media and WWII movies or if it has a religious basis, I find it very worrisome for the USA. SOrry flyingillini

BTW, being critical of Israel is not anti-semitic IMO

---

Honestly the support for Israel on the religious right is a combination of a lot of different things.

Primarily among them:

1) A lot of Christian evangelicals subscribe to a belief known as Dispensationalism which has a strong connection with Israel for reasons far too complicated for a gambling forum.

2) A large portion of the religious right is anti-Muslim, while in the past they may have been Anti-Jewish, this Anti-Jew sentiment has in recent years been subsumed by their anti-Muslim tendencies, so in a conflict between a Jewish nation and predominantly Muslim nations, they are more likely to choose the Jewish nation.

3) A large number of them want to visit Israel, it is no doubt the case, especially since the Arab Spring that the holy sites to Christians in what is now Israel would be safer toward American visitors were they in Israel's hands rather than a surrounding Arab counties.

4) More pragmatically, fundamentalist, traditionalist Islam has allied itself against globalization and the forces of the west. Israel represents western ideas against more traditionalist where as Christian fundamentalism has allied itself with globalization(even though on a fundamental level they are more akin to the traditional Islamic worldview). So in this battle, the defining battle of the 21st century really, those that have allied themselves with globalization and are therefore much more likely to ally themselves with nations that support it. For a good read on this conflict that was written, I recommend the book, Jihad vs. McWorld by Benjamin Barber, based on an article originally published in 1992(Barber himself regrets using the term Jihad).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy117

Infrastructure-Private sector doesn't fund projects like suspension bridges, tunnels, the interstate highway system, subways, the Hoover Dam.

---

This is just false, the private sector has funded all of those types of projects. The government has effectively given itself a monopoly on transportation though, so the private sector has less incentives to fund infrastructure.

Quote:

---

NASA-like Mitt Romney said (paraphrased) if someone brought that project to me (going to the moon) I'd say you're fired!

---

And what good did going to the moon accomplish? The plebs love looking at men on spaceships, but there has been no benefits other than that.

Yes, I think I found one. The goverment is better keeping the jobs at home. At least I dont see the white house opening too many positions in China. My last 3 jobs were in private companies and all emigrated to Asia. Soon there will no private companies left in USA except the healthcare that is paid mainly by the "goverment" as the medicare and medicaid are the main health insurance in the country.

To answer OP's question: No.

See:
East Germany, North Korea, Maoist China
vs.
West Germany, South Korea, Hong Kong

Government always fails.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iced

This is just false, the private sector has funded all of those types of projects. The government has effectively given itself a monopoly on transportation though, so the private sector has less incentives to fund infrastructure.

---

Please tell me how a private company would fund/recoup costs for a true interstate highway system. Would we pay tolls to drive from Maine to California? Yes, private companies have funded individual toll roads that are called "interstates" but not the whole system itself.