• crackajack@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anyone who worked in both private and public would know both are not more efficient than the other.

    Public services are chronically underfunded because of corruption. Private companies perform rabbit in a hat trick by making you guess what undisclosed ingredients they put in your food if they’re not regulated, just so to save cost and make money for themselves!

  • LoamImprovement@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They’re efficient at maximizing profits for shareholders, usually at the dire expense of literally everyone else.

  • Rooskie91@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Private companies literally paid billions of dollar to dismantle a (more or less) effective government just so that they could say this (and its still wrong).

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In my (Australian) public service career I have watched a team of 100 public servants deliver and keep updated a data capture and processing system

      A large American service company now does that job with four times the people. It took years to get them to add keyboard shortcuts to their product - the original was entirely mouse driven; and their product didn’t meet contrast rules for months

    • sus@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      can you call a government that allows itself to be turned into a caricature of itself efficient?

  • uphillbothways@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ya know what was a foundational part of the American dream? Pensions. Ya know which employers still offer them? Counties, states and the federal government.

    Private companies exist solely to make the people at the top very rich based on the stolen value of employee labor while dumping catastrophic losses in the public sphere. That’s capitalism in a nutshell.

    You’d have to be unbelievably gullible, naive, traumatized AND brainwashed to be a diehard for a system like that. But, somehow they’ve managed it. A deluded nation of Amway top performers just one move away from making their own imaginary millions. All simping for the system.

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yesterday an American accidentally admitted that they tip their landlord. It was at that point I said to myself “man you fuckers deserve to suffer under whatever republican you end up voting for next election because we all know that’s what you dumb ass motherfuckers are going to do”

    • IHadTwoCows@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Telecommunications Act. 1996. The Great Brainwashing where the Party began telling you to ignore the evidence of your eyes and ears.

      The best part? …if you endorse force and shick therespy to fix this fucking shit even the “leftists” will call you a violent fascist. Everyone got brainwashed.

  • UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Corruption is the issue when governments are involved with capital. Social inequality is the issue when private owners control the capital.

    My view is that having an army and control over the capital is too many eggs in the same basket.

    • NAXLAB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      So… Without a government, there just wouldn’t be armies? Rich and powerful private citizens wouldn’t form their own armed forces?

      • prunerye@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why wouldn’t there be warlords? I’m not sure how this comment follows. Without a government, you get both eggs in one basket, which the original commenter agrees is bad.

  • books@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Having worked on both sides. Private industry has the ability to quickly maneuver and change tact.

    Imo

    • foo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It depends on the industry. Huge publicly traded organizations are basically as bad as government

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve peaked inside large private companies. They’re no better than public companies. Turns out, being large means you can’t move very fast.

        • books@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh, you can quickly create a new division/bureau/area and hire for the new roll and when it doesn’t work out you can fire easily. That ain’t possible within government where everything is governed by statue or rule

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    But government likes to starve the stuff they run to make it look bad so they can carve it up and sell it to their mates. See literally anything Britain privatised.

    Anything with no competition trends towards being shit over time.

  • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Private companies are master at screwing customers for profit. Lefts not try to be private companies.

  • SapphironZA@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the issue is large organizations are inefficient and inflexible, be they government or corporates.

    You want small lean groups with a lot of autonomy.

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not just that. You want businesses to be able to fail if they are being run poorly. That’s something that’s a lot harder with government agencies, state owned enterprises, and large companies.

      • government agencies: People rely on them by design. You can’t simply shut down the health care or welfare system because it’s being run poorly or corruptly.
      • state owned enterprises: There is pressure from the ruling class to keep even inefficiently run or corrupt SOE going because they provide jobs and patronage.
      • large companies: They become systemically important. The loss of a single large business can cascade through the economy. See: Lehman Brothers or the big auto companies during the 2008 crash.
    • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Our corporate structures and limited liability not only make these massive orgs possible, but incentivize some truly insane megacorps.

  • pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    But surely you must admit that they do extract more wealth from the working classes for people who just move money around. Let’s see your profit-less crown corporation do that. Checkmate /s