|
|
|
|
|
|
by dsfyu404ed
2589 days ago
|
|
|
There's definitely some room for nuance though. Government's actions are constrained by a massive aversion to risk. I think in some areas there's definitely opportunity for private companies to provide services cheaper/better than they currently are while still having room for profit. Also, contracting out to private entities gives people someone to sue (without leaving the taxpayers on the hook) and the government someone to fire (or not renew their contract) when things get F'd up. Compare the options available to the public if the police misbehave vs if private security guards hired by the city/town misbehave. Government should contract out the things private industry does better and cheaper and in-house things that private industry cannot do. For example, government should give money to organizations that run homeless shelters, not run the shelter itself. If there are local options for getting rid of scrap metal then the government should not be taking appliances as part of city trash pickup. There's definitely things that government should be doing (like social safety nets) but not everything government does is stuff government should be spending its time and money doing. For the things that government does not do it should act as a check to make sure nothing gets too out of hand, like an operating system managing resources and the software using them. |
|
|
Most of the topics listed in the blog post fall under social safety net.
"...a lack of government commitment to provide equal access to the basic services families need to thrive. These services include access to quality education, affordable housing/healthcare/food, physical safety, accurate news and information, a social safety net, and a livable environment.
We believe that a new generation of technology startups are emerging who will start to address these needs"
They explicitly state they are looking for startups to address social safety net needs. That is what I am criticizing.