Re: a dumb query? pls humor me
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:31 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Freddy Freeloader wrote:
>
> > LOL. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and even a blind
> > squirrel finds a nut sometimes. One working state government hospital
> > does not equal a working federal bureaucracy. An example of a broken
> > federal health care system is a much more relevant example to having a
> > federal health care system.
>
> There's more than one way to skin a cat. Just because the feds hit on the
> wrong way doesn't mean they couldn't adopt a workable way that a state has
> discovered. Expecting (or as you are doing, promoting) mediocracy out of
> government results in mediocre governance. It's *your* government, for and
> by you. Hold them to a higher standard.
Let's see. If we take a realistic look at how government bureaucracies
perform rather than assuming that somehow human nature inside a
bureaucracy is magically going to change if our government becomes
socialistic we are encouraging mediocrity? It's a world-wide phenomena
that bureacrats and bureaucracies are very resistant to change. This has
been documented for decades, but acknowledging this is somehow a
negative.
LOL. You're still trying, Paul, but still not making very effective
arguments.
>
> > And, do you really think that scapegoating one guy is going to change
> > the decades of inefficiency and corruption that are built into the
> > system? If you know anything about bureaucracy you know it is highly
> > resistant to change. Criminy, the senators doing all the squawking are
> > a part of the problem, not the solution. All the vast majority of
> > politicians have ever cared a bout is making a surface change. That's
> > what gets them votes in their eyes.
>
> Not exactly a scapegoat when he's the one in charge and responsible for the
> well-being of his subordinates (staff and patients alike in this case).
> More like rightly placed blame for not taking care of the problem sooner.
> He's not the only one who should loose their job over that.
>
Really? Why then are not the majority of the leadership and mid-level
bureaucrats not gone? They are all responsible for the problem. It's
pervasive. Changing one man, or even a few people isn't going to change
anything. The entire socialistic structure has to go. Personal
responsibility must exist all the way structure. As if that is going to
happen in a society that seems to abhor the concept.
>
>
>
Reply to: