- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Folks, Why Are Government Employees So Scared To Work In The Private Sector?
Posted on 1/13/19 at 6:32 am to BornAndRaised_LA
Posted on 1/13/19 at 6:32 am to BornAndRaised_LA
quote:
BornAndRaised_LA
quote:Private corporations monitor, primarily, for exactly the same reason anyone monitors . . . safety assurance and performance improvement. They do so because catastrophe, complaint, or poor consumer outcome is very bad for business. They do so to invite better placement in the intercorporate pecking order. To imply that “Will I get in trouble” plays any sort of statistical significance in overall safety outcome in self-policing is silly.
but they monitor it from the vantage point of “Will I get in trouble”
Case in point, does the Federal Government monitor airlines beating the crap out of rightfully tickets passengers on overbooked flights? Nope. But you can bet your arse that after the UA incident, UnitedAir and others do. Why? Because such occurrences suck for business.
Are there exceptions to the above?
You bet!
The Ford Pinto Case is a great example. It is in seeking out or preventing those episodes that government oversight plays its largest role. It is also in traversing intra or intercorporate obstacles during investigation that the government has a significant role.
But your premise that Government oversight is not without it's own warts is false. It is false to the point of being laughable. FWIW, your downplay of its negative effect in cost and quality of healthcare indicates either extreme bias, or lack of understanding.
Basically in response to contentions that government oversight is not automatically a good thing, and private industry self-policing is outstanding and effective in most incidences, you nonetheless contradict the irrefutable. That, my friend, is a flaw often noted in instances where government oversight is flawed and not a good thing.
Which begs the question, do you work for the government?
1
Posted on 1/13/19 at 6:38 am to foshizzle
quote:Especially in the terms his post was framed.
In other words, you don't know what you're talking about.
quote:Spot on. Unfortunately, as with the "thin blue line", it is a few bad apples that spoil perception of the whole bunch.
This is one of those "facts" that isn't really true most of the time but sometimes is.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 6:56 am to Jake_LaMotta
I have dealt with hundreds, if not thousands of these people in my life. "Government Employees" is pretty broad. There are a lot of good ones, but the vast majority of them are incompetent fools. There are only so many employment opportunities for the worst of the boobs and, unfortunately, the govt. is the world's biggest employer of them.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 7:07 am to cable
Civil Service has too many civilians.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 7:22 am to Jake_LaMotta
Simply go to a government funded business like a hospital. Then go to a privately owned one. Twice as many people doing half the work in the gov owned one. Go to Conway Hospital in Monroe...walk around. Half the employees will either be chatting or smoking outside, or sitting in their cars. I have seen the stats...except for the nursing side, double the employees. (Yes I know they have been bought out, but its still subsidized).
Posted on 1/13/19 at 7:25 am to jeffsdad
quote:
Simply go to a government funded business like a hospital. Then go to a privately owned one. Twice as many people doing half the work in the gov owned one. Go to Conway Hospital in Monroe...walk around.
Look at the overall demographics of both as well.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 7:29 am to BornAndRaised_LA
quote:
Spoken like someone who actually knows no federal employees nor is aware the critical service they provide to the nation.
There is a lot of wasted positions in fedgov. Speaking from experience when I was looking for jobs. Probably the most egregious was the need to hire multiple “range managers” for all of our national parks.
The job description was basically riding around on a side by side and picking up sticks. Instead of hiring these people on an as needed basis, they were hiring multiple ones for almost every national park in the country.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 8:26 am to Jake_LaMotta
quote:”Fear” is the wrong term, but “risk aversion” is certainly a factor.
Folks, Why Are Government Employees So Scared To Work In The Private Sector?
Taking a government job is much like investing in T-Bills rather than stocks. Lower return exchanged for higher security. Take away the “higher security,” and you will eventually have to increase the return. Is that really what we want?
Posted on 1/13/19 at 8:39 am to cykablyat
quote:
Basically, it would be easy and lucrative for a watch dog company to take to Facebook and Twitter if it found violations that the public would care about.
This was obviously impossible 100 years ago and we needed regulations. Today, I'm thinking not so much.
How does a watchdog group get oversight on private property?
Posted on 1/13/19 at 8:41 am to AggieHank86
quote:Indeed.
”Fear” is the wrong term, but “risk aversion” is certainly a factor.
Posted on 1/13/19 at 9:12 am to NC_Tigah
Though I’m sure it makes for easier argument to attack snippets of an argument instead of refuting it as a whole, it weakens your entire post.
What I wrote: “they monitor it from the vantage point of “Will I get in trouble” and will it impact my sales/profits”. External oversight provides the other side. Restaurants get closed constantly by external health inspectors that would otherwise be content to remain open. Not all are as altruistic as you give Chipotle credit for.”
What you heard: “they monitor it from the vantage point of “Will I get in trouble”
You then absorbed my second point as your own.
You followed with this red herring:
This point was not raised, nor is it a premise on my response.
What I wrote: “they monitor it from the vantage point of “Will I get in trouble” and will it impact my sales/profits”. External oversight provides the other side. Restaurants get closed constantly by external health inspectors that would otherwise be content to remain open. Not all are as altruistic as you give Chipotle credit for.”
What you heard: “they monitor it from the vantage point of “Will I get in trouble”
You then absorbed my second point as your own.
You followed with this red herring:
quote:
your premise that Government oversight is not without it's own warts is false. It is false to the point of being laughable. FWIW, your downplay of its negative effect in cost and quality of healthcare indicates either extreme bias, or lack of understanding.
This point was not raised, nor is it a premise on my response.
This post was edited on 1/13/19 at 9:14 am
Posted on 1/13/19 at 1:08 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
Yes
Posted on 1/13/19 at 2:33 pm to bmy
quote:
How does a watchdog group get oversight on private property?
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News