Have you had enough of running the government like a business yet? No. 1

[Horatio Parker]

That govt is a business is a delusion, yes. And if you admit that, it's a short jump to admit the need to run it differently.

I can't speak for those who disagree or those who know better but say so because it's in their self interest.

Are you arguing that govt is a business?

No, I'm arguing it's ridiculous to say the government is being run like a business.

Who has said that?

 

[dismal]

No, I'm arguing it's ridiculous to say the government is being run like a business.

Who has said that?

Um. the thread title?

 

[Horatio Parker]

Who has said that?

Um. the thread title?

You should read a bit more:

One of the talking points of conservatives is that we should run the government like a business. That a businessman could run the government more efficiently than a politician.

No one except your imaginary opponent is arguing that govt is run like a business.

 

[laughing dog]

The "customers" of government can change the management - customers of business cannot.

How very optimistic. While that's true in a high school civics classroom, it is quite a bit harder in the real world.

It is true outside of the high school civics classroom in the USA and other republics.
And it is not as hard as customers directly changing the management of a business.

 

[braces_for_impact]

That's the point though. Many conservatives say they want the government run like a business, but they themselves don't know what that means. Most new businesses fail. We can't afford for that to happen to our government.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

How very optimistic. While that's true in a high school civics classroom, it is quite a bit harder in the real world.

It is true outside of the high school civics classroom in the USA and other republics.
And it is not as hard as customers directly changing the management of a business.

That's why the US electorate was stuck between Hillary and Trump, and have 99% of the government being the permanent bureaucracy that doesn't change no matter who the top political appointees are.

 

[ZiprHead]

Jesus fucking christ.

Another thread dismalized.

 

[laughing dog]

It is true outside of the high school civics classroom in the USA and other republics.
And it is not as hard as customers directly changing the management of a business.

That's why the US electorate was stuck between Hillary and Trump, and have 99% of the government being the permanent bureaucracy that doesn't change no matter who the top political appointees are.

If you do not think there were substantial differences between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump, a reality based discussion is not possible. If you think a "permanent bureaucracy" means no change is possible or that change does not occur with a change in regime, you are unfamiliar with reality.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

There's substantial difference between being shot, being poisoned, being stabbed, being beheaded, being electrocuted, and being hanged. The end result is still the same. Sure, there are substantial differences between these two very different bottom of the barrel candidates.

The political appointees at the top only have so much power over the permanent bureaucracy under them. The top bureaucrat just under the political appointee is the one who really runs the organization. That is reality.

 

[Ford]

If you think a "permanent bureaucracy" means no change is possible or that change does not occur with a change in regime, you are unfamiliar with reality.

Yeah, but he said the phrase "permanent bureaucracy" three times now, so that must mean it is a real thing.

 

[laughing dog]

There's substantial difference between being shot, being poisoned, being stabbed, being beheaded, being electrocuted, and being hanged. The end result is still the same. Sure, there are substantial differences between these two very different bottom of the barrel candidates.

A simple "I was mistaken" would have been sufficient instead of that babble.

The political appointees at the top only have so much power over the permanent bureaucracy under them. The top bureaucrat just under the political appointee is the one who really runs the organization. That is reality.

Perhaps in lalaberterian world. Reality is much different than that.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

There's substantial difference between being shot, being poisoned, being stabbed, being beheaded, being electrocuted, and being hanged. The end result is still the same. Sure, there are substantial differences between these two very different bottom of the barrel candidates.

A simple "I was mistaken" would have been sufficient instead of that babble.

I pointed out how I wasn't mistaken.

I wrote that our electoral process gave us a really awful choice between Trump and Clinton. You accused me of saying they were the same (reading comprehension fail). I pointed out that there are many different bad things out there, so saying two things are bad isn't the same as saying they are the same. You concluded I was admitting error (reading comprehension fail). I wonder how you're going to mess this one up.

The political appointees at the top only have so much power over the permanent bureaucracy under them. The top bureaucrat just under the political appointee is the one who really runs the organization. That is reality.

Perhaps in lalaberterian world. Reality is much different than that.

I guess you never really did learn much about organizational structure.

 

[laughing dog]

I pointed out how I wasn't mistaken.

And you are mistaken.

I wrote that our electoral process gave us a really awful choice between Trump and Clinton. You accused me of saying they were the same (reading comprehension fail). I pointed out that there are many different bad things out there, so saying two things are bad isn't the same as saying they are the same. You concluded I was admitting error (reading comprehension fail). I wonder how you're going to mess this one up.

You responded to "The "customers" of government can change the management - customers of business cannot." If you were actually responding to the content of my post, then a logical reading of your response was that there two did not represent a difference (i.e. a change in management). Whether or not Trump and Clinton represented awful choices was not relevant to the issue of changing management. Your current response is a tacit admission that you babbled a straw man response.

I guess you never really did learn much about organizational structure.

Wrong again. I have worked in government agencies. I have worked for government agencies. I have many colleagues who work in government agencies. My experience and their experience is completely inconsistent with your hand-waved counterfactual analysis.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Then your comprehension fails go way beyond reading comprehension.

"I'm tired of having to choose between a turd sandwich and a giant douche."
"Here's another turd sandwich and another giant douche."
"I said I wanted something different."
"You're saying the two of them are the same as each other."

Nope. You're saying that as long as the choice is always a turd sandwich or a giant douche, then we have all the choice we ever need.

 

[dismal]

Um. the thread title?

You should read a bit more:

One of the talking points of conservatives is that we should run the government like a business. That a businessman could run the government more efficiently than a politician.

No one except your imaginary opponent is arguing that govt is run like a business.

If the government is not being "run like a business" how could anyone have had enough of the government being run like a business yet?

 

[Horatio Parker]

You should read a bit more:

One of the talking points of conservatives is that we should run the government like a business. That a businessman could run the government more efficiently than a politician.

No one except your imaginary opponent is arguing that govt is run like a business.

If the government is not being "run like a business" how could anyone have had enough of the government being run like a business yet?

Try reading the OP.

One of the talking points of conservatives is that we should run the government like a business.

It does not say that govt is a business, or that it is run like a business.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Originally Posted by dismal

"The government" is about 99.9766% the same as it was 6 months ago.

I'm seeing this "argument" gaining ground a lot on Twitter and other sources. It's such a bald-faced dodge. The president being a pathological liar effects everyone. If he doesn't have to tell the truth and can use the government for his personal enrichment and extension of power, why can't anyone else? The president effects our culture, our esteem and respect in the world, and the hopes of millions, maybe even billions around the world. His character is important, as is his competence.

 

[laughing dog]

Then your my comprehension fails go way beyond reading comprehension. ...

Fixed it for you.

You are the one arguing against “The "customers" of government can change the management - customers of business cannot.” not me. Trump is obviously much different than Obama. The federal government is changing course and direction in many areas. The fact you do not care for either or for Hillary Clinton is irrelevant to the fact that citizens can and do change their government in significant ways.

"I'm tired of having to choose between a turd sandwich and a giant douche."
"Here's another turd sandwich and another giant douche."
"I said I wanted something different."
"You're saying the two of them are the same as each other."

Nope. You're saying that as long as the choice is always a turd sandwich or a giant douche, then we have all the choice we ever need.

I appreciate the amount of effort it must have taken you to shift from an incredibly stupid straw man argument to a stupid straw man, but I want something different - a relevant response to the actual content of the post.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Fixed it for youAgree with you.

Fixed it for you.

You are the one arguing against “The "customers" of government can change the management - customers of business cannot.” not me. Trump is obviously much different than Obama. The federal government is changing course and direction in many areas. The fact you do not care for either or for Hillary Clinton is irrelevant to the fact that citizens can and do change their government in significant ways.

Evidence indicates that I am right. Sure the very top level person is different. The 99% permanent bureaucracy is unchanged.

I want something different - a relevant response to the actual content of the post.

If you don't like what you are providing, try providing something different.

 

[laughing dog]

Evidence indicates that I am right. Sure the very top level person is different. The 99% permanent bureaucracy is unchanged.

Whether the personnel has changed is not relevant - it is whether the policies have. So once again, you have responded with an irrelevancy.

If you don't like what you are providing, try providing something different.

Why not try something different for you and respond with a relevant and cogent post that addresses the actual content of a post?