|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:10 am
Invictus_88 Daemon Sanctus Invictus_88 Aperium UnoriginalName State-run basic services generally leads to corruption, poor management and inefficiency. Yes, this is my belief also.
It seems to be that the difference is not caused by their being public or private companies, but in their accountability.
If an organisation is not and cannot be held accountable then corruption will begin to take root, this being as true for a government department as for a multinational company.
Transparency, and with that the ability to strike down people who undermine the integrity of the organisation, are the best defences against corruption.I agree. Although, in terms of inefficiency, I would say a good healthy dose of competition should be able to maintain that. It wasn't my intent to disregard Government departments, but rather that competition could help increase efficiency of State run services.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:02 am
Sorry, I didn't think on the Utopian part of such a system. Of course, that raises questions about whether a Utopian state implies perfect people or the perfect government for dealing with imperfect people xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:05 pm
Swordmaster Dragon Sorry, I didn't think on the Utopian part of such a system. Of course, that raises questions about whether a Utopian state implies perfect people or the perfect government for dealing with imperfect people xp It's obvious, that people will never be perfect. Some say that government can't be earthier, but I disagree. The closest we can come to a Utopian society (without brain washing people) it a perfect government. One that can change with time, can't become corrupted, keeps society in check without limiting freedoms, exc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:38 pm
Swordmaster Dragon Sorry, I didn't think on the Utopian part of such a system. Of course, that raises questions about whether a Utopian state implies perfect people or the perfect government for dealing with imperfect people xp
I suspect not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:12 pm
Very true. But back on topic:
Daemon Sanctus, while your idea of subdividing government departments to increase efficiency between them is intriguing, I see financial problems. Namely, you'd have to support each various department, increasing the base amount of money invested. Instead of buying 300 shovels for one government construction "company", you're buying 100 each for 5 or 6 different subcategories. Maybe there's another way to ensure such government efficiency?
Transparency, strict accounting, etc. would be a good start, but I don't think that satiates our theoretical needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:20 pm
Steven Hawakins I believe that centralizing the most vital parts to the government will help secure energy needs, water, economic growth and etc. While allowing less important things such as computers and toys; for example belong to the civilian corporations. This prevents other countries from taking control of vital aspects of the country. Let me hear what you think on this topic. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you. Government is the problem. If we centralize government it will help the things you stated yes, but there will still be conflict based on political dicision. I mean war. If we eradicate most of the government of all nations it will be up to the people, a direct democracy you could say. You could a few representatives together and they would decide what is best for the nation/community. Never trust your government with anything, especially your life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:03 pm
Your reply is exactly on par with...well, what I'd like to fix. As of now, the government doesn't have credibility or accountability, and it certainly doesn't have the trust of the people. You have to be able to put faith in the government, but that only happens when you understand how the government works, and it can be held accountable for its actions.
I'd like a government in which I could entrust my life. It's far away, but it's a nice goal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:27 pm
Read my Alternate Constitution thread! Read the First Post!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:41 pm
i think we are so gunhoo with the goverment. come on people it is about 200 people that are running our country. making lawas that we brake every day and night. why dont we make laws that we dont brake???? has any one eva thought of that????
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:12 pm
If we made laws that no-one broke, we wouldn't need to make them in the first place. Of course, that would also require that we had a national religion or a national set of ethics that everyone followed strictly and well...no one follows their own code of ethics strictly, much less someone else's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:22 pm
colly91 i think we are so gunhoo with the goverment. come on people it is about 200 people that are running our country. making lawas that we brake every day and night. why dont we make laws that we dont brake???? has any one eva thought of that???? I agree that law makes use loop holes to bypass laws or break them is immoral on their part, but this would not work. Sooner or later someone will break the rules and others will follow. I approve of strict drinking laws, but a law is words on paper unless its enforced. Those that make the so called laws that can't be broken, are enforcing them can also break them. It's be proven time and time again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
