Privatizing the entire Bureaucracy would be a horrible move. It could lead to monopolies in certain sectors of business and lead to the unfair handling of services being provided. Fortunately this is not an all-or-nothing choice. I believe that we should privatize specific portions of the bureaucracy. Based upon different parts of it, privatizing it could greatly improve our Bureaucracy. As we had briefly discussed in class over the Wilson reading, the DMV is as horribly inefficient as it is because of the fact that it’s part of the Bureaucracy. It’s as if they’re trapped to be inefficient because if they are too efficient, they lose funding because it appears as if they don’t need it, and there are many other factors at play that make it difficult for the DMV to be a well-run service. If the DMV were privatized, they would be able to see the direct return for improving their efficiency and overall well-being of the business. This would make the owners happy, as well as the customers. This proves that some privatization could greatly enhance our country, but full privatization would not be great. As an example, if the Defense Department were privatized we could lead ourselves into various unfortunate situations, and probably some unnecessary wars. Overall, I feel that privatization is a good tool we can use to enhance some parts of our Bureaucracy, but not all of it. For other parts that we can’t, other types of reform need to be put into place to really improve it.
One solution that has been posed is changning the system that exists and make the bureaucracy run like a business. I don't agree with this solution because businesses strive to make a profit without necessarily caring sbout the well being of the public. These agencies were created to protect the public good. Privitization can lead to less regulation and higher risk to the people of the United States. If the EPA was privitized some regulations might be taken away to maximize profits and the Connecticut River may turn green once again
I do agree with the fact that in order to protect the safety of the people being served by the bureaucracies, the bureaucracy should not be privatized, however do you think that, as Zach said, there are certain parts that can benefit from being privatized. I believe the DMV, as inefficient as it is, is not a part that should be privatized due to how much of our safety it deals with. The EPA, on the other hand, was restricted by the way the government was running it and stated that they would've been more successful within other circumstances. So are you absolutely 100% opposed to the privatization of certain parts or do you think there may be leeway?
Privatizing the bureaucracy easily has more negatives to it than positives. Of coarse the inefficiency of the bureaucracy is annoying, but its just that, annoying. The bureaucracy is out for the publics good, and is defiantly safe. Privatizing the bureaucracy will have major consequences. Businesses care about one thing only, money. They will no doubt find the cheapest way possible to do everything leading many people not to trust it. I disagree with Zach, and believe that privatizing is an all or nothing choice because once one agency becomes privatized the rest will slowly start to fall. Yes, it would be nice if the DMV was more efficient, but its not killing anybody. American's greediness of things being done in the matter of minutes will cause for unfavorable effects to occur. If the FDA was privatized there is a very high chance that the food in your kitchen would not be safe, since privatized businesses are what created the FDA in the first place. Overall, all businesses care about is money, so Americans need to keep the bureaucracy to ensure that someone is actually looking out for them.
Zach, Amber, and Carrigan all make very good points and my post will probably sound repetitive because I agree with them all so strongly. Privatizing the bureaucracy may sound like a good idea at first, but it would negatively impact the public in many ways. Zach mentioned monopolies as a result of privatization which is a large possibility. Monopolies are dangerous because they can lead to the public complying with unreasonable services because it is their only option. Businesses are motivated solely by making money and they do not particularly care about the people they are serving as long as they are getting paid. For this reason, the government creates certain parts of the bureaucracies to monitor businesses and protect the public. If departments like these (FDA,OSHA, CPSC) were to be run by businesses, then there would be no one to protect the public from the corruption of corporations. All of the privatized sectors would create deals behind the scenes to maximize their own profits not taking into consideration how the deals made may affect the people. Along with the increased efficiency that comes with being motivated by money, also comes corruption and danger for the public.
I agree very much with Cara and Kayla. I think that the risk of privatization is too great, because there would be a lack of credibility in the programs as a result. The government's lack of incentive for workers is, in a way, very beneficial, because it allows the consumer to be more certain that people were not seeking their own benefit when doing work in that department. If a government department were to be handled privately, there would be less certainty that the consumer's best interests were being protected. Just as Kayla mentioned, especially for departments such as the FDA and OSHA, which deal with consumer protection, having behind-closed-doors deals are risks that could have disastrous impacts and cause a multitude of problems for our consumers. As Cara said, the inefficiencies in our bureaucratic departments are just annoyances. Ultimately, though, they are still efficient, more so than a private department would be, because most accomplish the goals set for them: serve the consumers and ensure their benefit in whatever areas you are tasked with. There is no guarantee that this would occur in a private sector, and so it is important that the bureaucracies stay away from privatization.
To privatize the bureaucracy would not help the USA too much. There are some sections of the Bureaucracy that should be run similar to a business, like the DMV in order to help them make decisions to help serve the public better. However, one of the fears that I have is that the bureaucracy would start to not work for the public good, but instead for profits. Now, this would be bad because the whole purpose of the bureaucracy is to serve the public. Let's look at one of the agencies as an example. Let's look at the Federal Trade Commission. If this was run as a business, they may decide to not regulate business and monopolies in order to gain a profit from companies with monopolies. The result is that companies may start to bully other companies like how Microsoft used to. The result would be bad policies by other businesses. Also, privatization of the bureaucracy can result in no more impersonality and in some cases inefficiency. I agree with Zach in that some parts of the bureaucracy should be privatized so that the public good can be met more easily, but some parts of the bureaucracy should definitely not be privatized.
Amber is correct. Businesses are out for profit and their own goals. The idea of privatizing the American bureaucracy is certainly not a helpful one. For people who disagree with me, have you ever met a business man? They are really good at persuading people and getting what they want. that is how they become successful. So in the future our government will essentially be thriving off of just what these private business owners are achieving for themselves. Also, it may seem like small private business will be more personable, but this is false. The business will be based off efficiency and time, not being close and friendly with their customers. We want a government that it is with us, not just using us.
Privatization of the bureaucracy would definitely not be best for the American public because, as already established, efficiency is not the main goal and private businesses would only offer efficiency to us. The more important thing is pubic service which will not be a private business' goal because they are only interested in efficiency which will give them higher profit. The bureaucracy in government is not focused on profit or efficiency and therefore are worried about our satisfaction and doing things the right way. This is much better than having a privatized system.
I think that Amber and Sarah had great points but their points should be used to argue for privatizing parts of the bureaucracy. PARTS meaning certain departments/agencies like Security and OSHA should not be privatized but I don’t see any problem with running others like the DMV or the VA as a business. Amber said that businesses are out for profit and their own goals and Sarah said that business men are really good at getting what they want and that is how they become successful. Well that’s all great news! Why don’t we have them in out bureaucracy then? Most of the pathologies we are complaining about have to deal with the bureaucracies not efficiently reaching their goals and not being successful. I’m not saying go privatize the DMV but why not run it like a business. Why not give incentives for the workers to do better and try and make money for the government. All of these peoples are getting bonuses anymore for doing absolutely nothing its quite sickening, Let’s take the DMV for example, if the DMV is making money for the government by being more efficient, use that money to offer raises and what not for the workers. All of these costs for licenses and what not, how do they not make money? And it was brought up in class that the only places that get money are the ones that are bad and need it, which goes along with schools, and how the schools with lower scores get all the money and the ones with better scores aren’t rewarded because they don’t “need” money. This needs to be changed and if the government were to run certain sections of the bureaucracy like a business it could be. Tell the DMV well yea we’ll give you more money to improve the place but if it doesn’t improve then job cuts, pay cuts and all of that could happen. That would surely get the ball rolling, that’s what businesses do. So overall I agree that certain parts of the bureaucracies can’t be privatized, but others should be. Who cares if they aren’t working for the greater good, they get what needs to be done, done inefficiently because they know money is on the line and that is what we need. UPS is doing just fine!
I agree with Zach MOSTLY that privatizing businesses would be horrible. While there are many cons, there are a few pros to this situation. One huge factor would be that businesses like competition so this could solve the duplication problem. Agencies could try to be the top agency in the agricultural field and so that would cause competition. This would lead to one business being on the top and the others forcing to close down. The other pro is that businesses would try to make money and the best way to do that is to get thing done fast. This is where the cons come in. fast doesn't always mean right. A lot of mistakes will happen is agencies are privatized. A business strives to make themselves money, so that might get rid of human compassion (not entirely). Also business could lead to major corruption in that agency. Jobs could potentially be bought and power could go to the wrong people. Overall, I believe that the bureaucracy shouldn't be privatized but at the same time some parts of it could.
I think that privatizing the government is a terrible idea. There are way too many people and agencies to shrink down and run like a business. Jobs could potentially be taken away from the wrong people and the person in charge could lose their position as well. The next question is how would all of this be run and organized. We cant even run our government now without problems so how would they run a smaller version without getting competition as a factor. There would be a lot of competition and arguing over who gets what benefits or positions or who is going to get paid higher. It is a disaster waiting to happen and it shouldn't go down that path. As I said earlier there are just simply too many people and too big of jobs to take care of that we need a larger system instead of a private little government.
Similar to what Sarah said, I also agree that the bureaucracy should not be privatized. There are only negative connotations that come with the thought of private companies. As everyone else stated, businesses have one goal in mind and that is to profit. When I think of private corporations, I think of corruption, and a bunch of money-hungry, old, white men who do not care for the people. Distrust in our public government is a problem already, think of how much more distrust in the government would increase if it were privatized. Sarah said businessmen know how to persuade people and it's scary to think that the bureaucracy would be run by men who are able to convince us to do things their way, when it may not be the best, or safest method. A government serves the people, and should not be profitting off of them.
whats wrong with gaining profit, if we cut our cost that means less for taxpayers to put up? skorsky makes profit while providing helicopters for the DOD. AAA makes licenses copies with a contract from the state, and does so in a efficient and effective matter. now I am not saying privatization of FEMA the Army, etc. but even the VA can be privatized slightly as i pointed out in my comment
I do not believe that the bureaucracy should ever be run like a business. I do not believe any good could come of that. Like Susan states, private companies only have one goal in mind and that is to profit at any cost. This causes people to only think with their wallets instead of their brains. Also, agreeing with Hannah, this could potentially cause the loss of jobs. The last think this economy needs is more people unemployed, and I think with the unemployment and the only main goal being a profit, having the government be more privatized and more like a business could ultimately cause massive problems for the government and the economy as a whole.
I agree with Susan that the bureaucracy should NOT be privatized. She brought up a very good point: when thinking of private corporations, corruption is one of the first things that come to mind. We all have to think of what our bureaucracy does, it's purpose is to benefit the COMMON GOOD, not to make profit. By privatizing even parts of the bureaucracy, that would seem to be more efficient and work at a faster pace by becoming privatized, would be taking away the entire concept of the bureaucracy. If that agency/department/corporation was it's own business it would not be looking out for the people, it would only be looking out for its own success. While the majority of us think the DMV would be better off privatized, think of the consequences that would come with it. It would be much easier for people to "get their license" by paying the owner(s) or a friend who works there. If something very simple like that could happen think of all of the other things that could go wrong along with it. Sarah brought up a very good point that we want the bureaucracy to be with us not just using us. Overall, it would be much more beneficial for the country to NOT privatize the bureaucracy in any way.
I agree with Susan that the bureaucracy should NOT be privatized. She brought up a very good point: when thinking of private corporations, corruption is one of the first things that come to mind. We all have to think of what our bureaucracy does, it's purpose is to benefit the COMMON GOOD, not to make profit. By privatizing even parts of the bureaucracy, that would seem to be more efficient and work at a faster pace by becoming privatized, would be taking away the entire concept of the bureaucracy. If that agency/department/corporation was it's own business it would not be looking out for the people, it would only be looking out for its own success. While the majority of us think the DMV would be better off privatized, think of the consequences that would come with it. It would be much easier for people to "get their license" by paying the owner(s) or a friend who works there. If something very simple like that could happen think of all of the other things that could go wrong along with it. Sarah brought up a very good point that we want the bureaucracy to be with us not just using us. Overall, it would be much more beneficial for the country to NOT privatize the bureaucracy in any way.
If the United States Bureaucracy were to be run by businesses, it would cause a lot of corruption in the system. There is a fine line between business and politics and they shouldn't mix as often as possible. The difference between business and politics is business's ultimate goal is monetary profit, and politics is for the good of the people, not for the monetary profit. If it were to mix it would give the already powerful, more power and it would cause an oligarchy. Jobs would also be taken away from people because if the bureaucracy become privatized, the business might not be able to sustain what the amount of jobs and still run functionally, so it would have to cut jobs that the government would be able to sustain. This would also ruin the economy because it would cause an influx of prices on several key things, no matter how much money it costs because the prices of essential things might become too high for the poorer people to afford, like health care or even getting a license. Having the bureaucracy become privatized would be one of the worst mistakes that can happen.
Well obviously literally everyone agrees so far that a general sweeping privatization would be a horrible idea the debate lies in what should be privatized exactly. I would say that some privatization would be okay, depending on what the bureaucratic agency's responsibility was. Generally things that don't involve safety or regulation of some business practice can be left to private industries. This includes things like mail. However when it comes to any kind of public safety it should be left up to the government and government alone. As many have pointed out business is out to make money, not to help you. The government, in theory, is there to help you. I don't want things such as if my drinking water is safe to drink, or if my hot dogs have people in them up to whether or not I have enough money to pay. The fundamental goals of government and business are different so there isn't reason to run them the same.
Well I'm going to stick out like a sore thumb here and say privatization is not bad, Now we don't want a US army rep knocking on our doors trying to sell us terrorism insurance for 9.99 a month, and if we don't they wont fight back. However things such as DMV services are already privatized. AAA can duplicate your licence with contract of the government. I would actually be a fan of the VA being partially privatized through contracts. Insurance companies have been dealing with claims for over a century (especially in CT) and they have a assembly line like method for dealing with them both effectively and efficiently. Now if the VA were to contract Aetna for example to handle claims for X amount of dollars and have the VA pay to have the claims dished out with tax money, this would solve many of the VA's problems. this creates competition between insurance companies for government contracts in a way to earn profit by using an efficient method for dealing with claims, that is profitable for the company within the VA's budget. as long as they meet the VA's standards they will receive compensation. this would save taxpayer dollars too because these companies already have the human and technological resources in place. I would not be surprised if this method is used in the next decade. this is the best thing I have ever written on the blog.
I agree with Sarah. I believe it would be a terrible idea to privatize the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is meant to provide public service. Businesses are not a bout the good of the people, they're about profit. Different agencies meant for the good of the people would become corrupt and soon would lose sight of their real goals. Then it would tie into the first quote about efficieny. Businesses have to be efficent to make money, meaning things wooulnd't be done thoroughly and nothing ould be done correctly. Like Sarah said, it would just be a government that is using us for their own personal gain.
I think I am agreeing with most people when I saw that privatizing the bureaucracy would not be a good idea at all. The bureaucracy should work to serve people without looking for profit in return and this is what makes it good for the people. If the bureaucracy were to be changed into a privatized structure that sense of doing what's best for the people regardless of one of the biggest factors, money. Like Craig said, DMV services are already privatized and since private companies are able to get things done faster and with more of a sense of urgency unlike when you have your dreaded visit to the DMV, the growing number of services to become privatized is bound to grow on the next couple of years.
I agree with Emily that the bureaucracy is meant to provide public service. It is important that they are an honestly run service for the people, unlike businesses who are just trying to create profit. The se government run programs are meant to help out their constituents. Businesses are supposed to produce products and serve customers who choose to buy them, and their goal is to get as many customers as they can. Government programs like the DMV already has many privatized companies that are turning an 2 hour visit into a quick 20 minute trip. With our economy growing everyday, and businesses trying to make as much profit as they can, many of our government agencies are most likely going to become privatized.
This is a horrible idea... the only positive thing that can come out of running the bureaucracy like a business is that is would be way more efficient and make he people happier. after that its all negative. first it would turn into ripping people off even more than the gov is doing now becuuase ike i said in my first post the peopel need placed like the DMV more then the DMV needs them. for example congress could pas laws requiring the public to have stuff just so the government would make more money because it would be a law. however the law could be declared unconstitutional by the courts and this whole idea of running it like a business if bad. It wouldn't look out for the people and only look out for making a profit.
Privatizing the entire Bureaucracy would be a horrible move. It could lead to monopolies in certain sectors of business and lead to the unfair handling of services being provided. Fortunately this is not an all-or-nothing choice. I believe that we should privatize specific portions of the bureaucracy. Based upon different parts of it, privatizing it could greatly improve our Bureaucracy. As we had briefly discussed in class over the Wilson reading, the DMV is as horribly inefficient as it is because of the fact that it’s part of the Bureaucracy. It’s as if they’re trapped to be inefficient because if they are too efficient, they lose funding because it appears as if they don’t need it, and there are many other factors at play that make it difficult for the DMV to be a well-run service. If the DMV were privatized, they would be able to see the direct return for improving their efficiency and overall well-being of the business. This would make the owners happy, as well as the customers. This proves that some privatization could greatly enhance our country, but full privatization would not be great. As an example, if the Defense Department were privatized we could lead ourselves into various unfortunate situations, and probably some unnecessary wars. Overall, I feel that privatization is a good tool we can use to enhance some parts of our Bureaucracy, but not all of it. For other parts that we can’t, other types of reform need to be put into place to really improve it.
ReplyDeleteOne solution that has been posed is changning the system that exists and make the bureaucracy run like a business. I don't agree with this solution because businesses strive to make a profit without necessarily caring sbout the well being of the public. These agencies were created to protect the public good. Privitization can lead to less regulation and higher risk to the people of the United States. If the EPA was privitized some regulations might be taken away to maximize profits and the Connecticut River may turn green once again
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the fact that in order to protect the safety of the people being served by the bureaucracies, the bureaucracy should not be privatized, however do you think that, as Zach said, there are certain parts that can benefit from being privatized. I believe the DMV, as inefficient as it is, is not a part that should be privatized due to how much of our safety it deals with. The EPA, on the other hand, was restricted by the way the government was running it and stated that they would've been more successful within other circumstances. So are you absolutely 100% opposed to the privatization of certain parts or do you think there may be leeway?
DeletePrivatizing the bureaucracy easily has more negatives to it than positives. Of coarse the inefficiency of the bureaucracy is annoying, but its just that, annoying. The bureaucracy is out for the publics good, and is defiantly safe. Privatizing the bureaucracy will have major consequences. Businesses care about one thing only, money. They will no doubt find the cheapest way possible to do everything leading many people not to trust it. I disagree with Zach, and believe that privatizing is an all or nothing choice because once one agency becomes privatized the rest will slowly start to fall. Yes, it would be nice if the DMV was more efficient, but its not killing anybody. American's greediness of things being done in the matter of minutes will cause for unfavorable effects to occur. If the FDA was privatized there is a very high chance that the food in your kitchen would not be safe, since privatized businesses are what created the FDA in the first place. Overall, all businesses care about is money, so Americans need to keep the bureaucracy to ensure that someone is actually looking out for them.
ReplyDeleteZach, Amber, and Carrigan all make very good points and my post will probably sound repetitive because I agree with them all so strongly. Privatizing the bureaucracy may sound like a good idea at first, but it would negatively impact the public in many ways. Zach mentioned monopolies as a result of privatization which is a large possibility. Monopolies are dangerous because they can lead to the public complying with unreasonable services because it is their only option. Businesses are motivated solely by making money and they do not particularly care about the people they are serving as long as they are getting paid. For this reason, the government creates certain parts of the bureaucracies to monitor businesses and protect the public. If departments like these (FDA,OSHA, CPSC) were to be run by businesses, then there would be no one to protect the public from the corruption of corporations. All of the privatized sectors would create deals behind the scenes to maximize their own profits not taking into consideration how the deals made may affect the people. Along with the increased efficiency that comes with being motivated by money, also comes corruption and danger for the public.
ReplyDeleteI agree very much with Cara and Kayla. I think that the risk of privatization is too great, because there would be a lack of credibility in the programs as a result. The government's lack of incentive for workers is, in a way, very beneficial, because it allows the consumer to be more certain that people were not seeking their own benefit when doing work in that department. If a government department were to be handled privately, there would be less certainty that the consumer's best interests were being protected. Just as Kayla mentioned, especially for departments such as the FDA and OSHA, which deal with consumer protection, having behind-closed-doors deals are risks that could have disastrous impacts and cause a multitude of problems for our consumers. As Cara said, the inefficiencies in our bureaucratic departments are just annoyances. Ultimately, though, they are still efficient, more so than a private department would be, because most accomplish the goals set for them: serve the consumers and ensure their benefit in whatever areas you are tasked with. There is no guarantee that this would occur in a private sector, and so it is important that the bureaucracies stay away from privatization.
ReplyDeleteTo privatize the bureaucracy would not help the USA too much. There are some sections of the Bureaucracy that should be run similar to a business, like the DMV in order to help them make decisions to help serve the public better. However, one of the fears that I have is that the bureaucracy would start to not work for the public good, but instead for profits. Now, this would be bad because the whole purpose of the bureaucracy is to serve the public. Let's look at one of the agencies as an example. Let's look at the Federal Trade Commission. If this was run as a business, they may decide to not regulate business and monopolies in order to gain a profit from companies with monopolies. The result is that companies may start to bully other companies like how Microsoft used to. The result would be bad policies by other businesses. Also, privatization of the bureaucracy can result in no more impersonality and in some cases inefficiency. I agree with Zach in that some parts of the bureaucracy should be privatized so that the public good can be met more easily, but some parts of the bureaucracy should definitely not be privatized.
ReplyDeleteAmber is correct. Businesses are out for profit and their own goals. The idea of privatizing the American bureaucracy is certainly not a helpful one. For people who disagree with me, have you ever met a business man? They are really good at persuading people and getting what they want. that is how they become successful. So in the future our government will essentially be thriving off of just what these private business owners are achieving for themselves. Also, it may seem like small private business will be more personable, but this is false. The business will be based off efficiency and time, not being close and friendly with their customers. We want a government that it is with us, not just using us.
ReplyDeletePrivatization of the bureaucracy would definitely not be best for the American public because, as already established, efficiency is not the main goal and private businesses would only offer efficiency to us. The more important thing is pubic service which will not be a private business' goal because they are only interested in efficiency which will give them higher profit. The bureaucracy in government is not focused on profit or efficiency and therefore are worried about our satisfaction and doing things the right way. This is much better than having a privatized system.
ReplyDeleteI think that Amber and Sarah had great points but their points should be used to argue for privatizing parts of the bureaucracy. PARTS meaning certain departments/agencies like Security and OSHA should not be privatized but I don’t see any problem with running others like the DMV or the VA as a business. Amber said that businesses are out for profit and their own goals and Sarah said that business men are really good at getting what they want and that is how they become successful. Well that’s all great news! Why don’t we have them in out bureaucracy then? Most of the pathologies we are complaining about have to deal with the bureaucracies not efficiently reaching their goals and not being successful. I’m not saying go privatize the DMV but why not run it like a business. Why not give incentives for the workers to do better and try and make money for the government. All of these peoples are getting bonuses anymore for doing absolutely nothing its quite sickening, Let’s take the DMV for example, if the DMV is making money for the government by being more efficient, use that money to offer raises and what not for the workers. All of these costs for licenses and what not, how do they not make money? And it was brought up in class that the only places that get money are the ones that are bad and need it, which goes along with schools, and how the schools with lower scores get all the money and the ones with better scores aren’t rewarded because they don’t “need” money. This needs to be changed and if the government were to run certain sections of the bureaucracy like a business it could be. Tell the DMV well yea we’ll give you more money to improve the place but if it doesn’t improve then job cuts, pay cuts and all of that could happen. That would surely get the ball rolling, that’s what businesses do. So overall I agree that certain parts of the bureaucracies can’t be privatized, but others should be. Who cares if they aren’t working for the greater good, they get what needs to be done, done inefficiently because they know money is on the line and that is what we need. UPS is doing just fine!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zach MOSTLY that privatizing businesses would be horrible. While there are many cons, there are a few pros to this situation. One huge factor would be that businesses like competition so this could solve the duplication problem. Agencies could try to be the top agency in the agricultural field and so that would cause competition. This would lead to one business being on the top and the others forcing to close down. The other pro is that businesses would try to make money and the best way to do that is to get thing done fast. This is where the cons come in. fast doesn't always mean right. A lot of mistakes will happen is agencies are privatized. A business strives to make themselves money, so that might get rid of human compassion (not entirely). Also business could lead to major corruption in that agency. Jobs could potentially be bought and power could go to the wrong people. Overall, I believe that the bureaucracy shouldn't be privatized but at the same time some parts of it could.
ReplyDeleteI think that privatizing the government is a terrible idea. There are way too many people and agencies to shrink down and run like a business. Jobs could potentially be taken away from the wrong people and the person in charge could lose their position as well. The next question is how would all of this be run and organized. We cant even run our government now without problems so how would they run a smaller version without getting competition as a factor. There would be a lot of competition and arguing over who gets what benefits or positions or who is going to get paid higher. It is a disaster waiting to happen and it shouldn't go down that path. As I said earlier there are just simply too many people and too big of jobs to take care of that we need a larger system instead of a private little government.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to what Sarah said, I also agree that the bureaucracy should not be privatized. There are only negative connotations that come with the thought of private companies. As everyone else stated, businesses have one goal in mind and that is to profit. When I think of private corporations, I think of corruption, and a bunch of money-hungry, old, white men who do not care for the people. Distrust in our public government is a problem already, think of how much more distrust in the government would increase if it were privatized. Sarah said businessmen know how to persuade people and it's scary to think that the bureaucracy would be run by men who are able to convince us to do things their way, when it may not be the best, or safest method. A government serves the people, and should not be profitting off of them.
ReplyDeletewhats wrong with gaining profit, if we cut our cost that means less for taxpayers to put up? skorsky makes profit while providing helicopters for the DOD. AAA makes licenses copies with a contract from the state, and does so in a efficient and effective matter. now I am not saying privatization of FEMA the Army, etc. but even the VA can be privatized slightly as i pointed out in my comment
DeleteI do not believe that the bureaucracy should ever be run like a business. I do not believe any good could come of that. Like Susan states, private companies only have one goal in mind and that is to profit at any cost. This causes people to only think with their wallets instead of their brains. Also, agreeing with Hannah, this could potentially cause the loss of jobs. The last think this economy needs is more people unemployed, and I think with the unemployment and the only main goal being a profit, having the government be more privatized and more like a business could ultimately cause massive problems for the government and the economy as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Susan that the bureaucracy should NOT be privatized. She brought up a very good point: when thinking of private corporations, corruption is one of the first things that come to mind. We all have to think of what our bureaucracy does, it's purpose is to benefit the COMMON GOOD, not to make profit. By privatizing even parts of the bureaucracy, that would seem to be more efficient and work at a faster pace by becoming privatized, would be taking away the entire concept of the bureaucracy. If that agency/department/corporation was it's own business it would not be looking out for the people, it would only be looking out for its own success. While the majority of us think the DMV would be better off privatized, think of the consequences that would come with it. It would be much easier for people to "get their license" by paying the owner(s) or a friend who works there. If something very simple like that could happen think of all of the other things that could go wrong along with it. Sarah brought up a very good point that we want the bureaucracy to be with us not just using us. Overall, it would be much more beneficial for the country to NOT privatize the bureaucracy in any way.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Susan that the bureaucracy should NOT be privatized. She brought up a very good point: when thinking of private corporations, corruption is one of the first things that come to mind. We all have to think of what our bureaucracy does, it's purpose is to benefit the COMMON GOOD, not to make profit. By privatizing even parts of the bureaucracy, that would seem to be more efficient and work at a faster pace by becoming privatized, would be taking away the entire concept of the bureaucracy. If that agency/department/corporation was it's own business it would not be looking out for the people, it would only be looking out for its own success. While the majority of us think the DMV would be better off privatized, think of the consequences that would come with it. It would be much easier for people to "get their license" by paying the owner(s) or a friend who works there. If something very simple like that could happen think of all of the other things that could go wrong along with it. Sarah brought up a very good point that we want the bureaucracy to be with us not just using us. Overall, it would be much more beneficial for the country to NOT privatize the bureaucracy in any way.
ReplyDeleteIf the United States Bureaucracy were to be run by businesses, it would cause a lot of corruption in the system. There is a fine line between business and politics and they shouldn't mix as often as possible. The difference between business and politics is business's ultimate goal is monetary profit, and politics is for the good of the people, not for the monetary profit. If it were to mix it would give the already powerful, more power and it would cause an oligarchy. Jobs would also be taken away from people because if the bureaucracy become privatized, the business might not be able to sustain what the amount of jobs and still run functionally, so it would have to cut jobs that the government would be able to sustain. This would also ruin the economy because it would cause an influx of prices on several key things, no matter how much money it costs because the prices of essential things might become too high for the poorer people to afford, like health care or even getting a license. Having the bureaucracy become privatized would be one of the worst mistakes that can happen.
ReplyDeleteWell obviously literally everyone agrees so far that a general sweeping privatization would be a horrible idea the debate lies in what should be privatized exactly. I would say that some privatization would be okay, depending on what the bureaucratic agency's responsibility was. Generally things that don't involve safety or regulation of some business practice can be left to private industries. This includes things like mail. However when it comes to any kind of public safety it should be left up to the government and government alone. As many have pointed out business is out to make money, not to help you. The government, in theory, is there to help you. I don't want things such as if my drinking water is safe to drink, or if my hot dogs have people in them up to whether or not I have enough money to pay. The fundamental goals of government and business are different so there isn't reason to run them the same.
ReplyDeleteWell I'm going to stick out like a sore thumb here and say privatization is not bad, Now we don't want a US army rep knocking on our doors trying to sell us terrorism insurance for 9.99 a month, and if we don't they wont fight back. However things such as DMV services are already privatized. AAA can duplicate your licence with contract of the government. I would actually be a fan of the VA being partially privatized through contracts. Insurance companies have been dealing with claims for over a century (especially in CT) and they have a assembly line like method for dealing with them both effectively and efficiently. Now if the VA were to contract Aetna for example to handle claims for X amount of dollars and have the VA pay to have the claims dished out with tax money, this would solve many of the VA's problems. this creates competition between insurance companies for government contracts in a way to earn profit by using an efficient method for dealing with claims, that is profitable for the company within the VA's budget. as long as they meet the VA's standards they will receive compensation. this would save taxpayer dollars too because these companies already have the human and technological resources in place. I would not be surprised if this method is used in the next decade. this is the best thing I have ever written on the blog.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sarah. I believe it would be a terrible idea to privatize the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is meant to provide public service. Businesses are not a bout the good of the people, they're about profit. Different agencies meant for the good of the people would become corrupt and soon would lose sight of their real goals. Then it would tie into the first quote about efficieny. Businesses have to be efficent to make money, meaning things wooulnd't be done thoroughly and nothing ould be done correctly. Like Sarah said, it would just be a government that is using us for their own personal gain.
ReplyDeleteI think I am agreeing with most people when I saw that privatizing the bureaucracy would not be a good idea at all. The bureaucracy should work to serve people without looking for profit in return and this is what makes it good for the people. If the bureaucracy were to be changed into a privatized structure that sense of doing what's best for the people regardless of one of the biggest factors, money. Like Craig said, DMV services are already privatized and since private companies are able to get things done faster and with more of a sense of urgency unlike when you have your dreaded visit to the DMV, the growing number of services to become privatized is bound to grow on the next couple of years.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Emily that the bureaucracy is meant to provide public service. It is important that they are an honestly run service for the people, unlike businesses who are just trying to create profit. The se government run programs are meant to help out their constituents. Businesses are supposed to produce products and serve customers who choose to buy them, and their goal is to get as many customers as they can. Government programs like the DMV already has many privatized companies that are turning an 2 hour visit into a quick 20 minute trip. With our economy growing everyday, and businesses trying to make as much profit as they can, many of our government agencies are most likely going to become privatized.
ReplyDeleteThis is a horrible idea... the only positive thing that can come out of running the bureaucracy like a business is that is would be way more efficient and make he people happier. after that its all negative. first it would turn into ripping people off even more than the gov is doing now becuuase ike i said in my first post the peopel need placed like the DMV more then the DMV needs them. for example congress could pas laws requiring the public to have stuff just so the government would make more money because it would be a law. however the law could be declared unconstitutional by the courts and this whole idea of running it like a business if bad. It wouldn't look out for the people and only look out for making a profit.
ReplyDelete