[photochemsyn]

It really depends on where responsibility begins and ends. It might make a lot more sense, financially, for the government to manage maintenance using supplies and equipments purchased from private companies, with the people working on the roads being government employees instead of employees of the contractors. However, for specific jobs - say building a new bridge, etc. - it might make sense to have that be a complete private contract, and then, after it's built, maintenance becomes the government responsibility.

In general however, there's too much opportunity for corruption if contracts are just blindly given to private interests by politicians. Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction contracts were a good example of how bad that can get.

[luckylion]

I think there's a good reason to have anti-corruption measures and bring down the hammer hard on everyone in the administration that tries to circumvent them, but I do believe that government is just too inefficient when it comes to doing things.

I'd rather risk that every tenth contract is fraudulent than have every contract cost twice as much with the government doing it themselves. There's just zero incentive for government employees to work quickly and efficiently.

Check private contractor's work to make sure they're not cutting any corners, make corruption harder and incentivize whistle-blowers, but letting the government do things is not something I want as a taxpayer.

[1letterunixname]

Privatized electric grid as a market led to Enron causing unnecessary rolling blackouts to make money.

The government is not a static hivemind, and deregulation and privatization are not panaceas.

The US political class (elected fraction of government) is among the most corrupt in the world. Campaign finance reform will never happen because the rich run America. If you think the rich have the needs of the many in mind when they spend billions on lobbying to get their way, I don't think you're fully aware of the situation in which America finds herself.

[wolverine876]

> I'd rather risk that every tenth contract is fraudulent than have every contract cost twice as much with the government doing it themselves.

If you create the numbers, you'll reach your expected conclusion.

> There's just zero incentive for government employees to work quickly and efficiently.

Stop demonizing people. Just talk to some government employees. The article talks about how management works at DOE labs.

[luckylion]

I'm not demonizing anyone, I'm talking about incentives.

And I've come to my understanding of how they work on government employees by talking to, and working with (as a consultant), government employees. There's a certain bureaucratic counterproductivity that I've only ever encountered in government employees.

If that doesn't match your experience and government in your area is highly efficient and you wouldn't change a thing, that's great and I envy you, but it's not my experience at all.

[wolverine876]

> government in your area is highly efficient and you wouldn't change a thing

More strawperson hyberbole. Hyberbole expresses only emotion; it adds nothing and gives us nothing to talk about on the merits.

So, you're feeling frustrated? Angry?

[1letterunixname]

Please don't antagonize a commenter or trivialize their condition. There are millions of frustrated Americans who can't articulate their discomforts much less their sources. There are many possibilities:

1. Loss of privilege and prestige socially and/or geopolitically

2. Lower income, more stress, working harder, and less financial freedom to have a happy enough life

3. Loss of community

4. Loss of safety

[luckylion]

Annoyed, I'd say, but it's okay. You want to talk about something else than what I was talking about. I cannot follow you there.