> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:01:28 +1200, "Pooh"
> wrote:
>

>> Rich80105 wrote:

>>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 10:02:41 +1200, "Laissez-faire"
>>> wrote:
>>>

>>>> whoisthis wrote:

>>>>> In article <4826e49f$1@clear.net.nz>,
>>>>> "Pooh" wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>> Rich80105 wrote:

>>>>>>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:38:14 +1200, whoisthis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> In article <482692ae$1@clear.net.nz>,
>>>>>>>> "Pooh" wrote:
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> whoisthis wrote:

>>>>>>>>>> In article <4826612c$1@clear.net.nz>,
>>>>>>>>>> "Pooh" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>

>> snipped>

>>>>>>>> So, I take that as a NO. You have no managerial experience,
>>>>>>>> nor do
>>>>>>>> you have any idea what anyone actually does. All you have to
>>>>>>>> go on
>>>>>>>> is your own opinion.

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no evidence that he is expressing his own opinion -
>>>>>>> it may
>>>>>>> be deliberate misinformation. It is hard to believe that
>>>>>>> anyone
>>>>>>> would carry such blind prejudice and lack of logic.

>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your a prime example of what you acuse me of Rich. What
>>>>>> experience
>>>>>> of the public service have you had? Or are you monarch of his
>>>>>> own
>>>>>> little dictatorship in the beehive? I've had experience of a
>>>>>> variety
>>>>>> of different departments in both stores and clerical
>>>>>> positions, plus
>>>>>> been involved with activities that looked at, amongst other
>>>>>> things,
>>>>>> misuse of funds and resources.What I said isn't just my
>>>>>> observatoions. It's been confirmed by talking with fellow
>>>>>> public
>>>>>> servants from several departments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Blind prejudice? You think everybody should be like you
>>>>>> parroting
>>>>>> senseless slogans in support of Clarkes mismanagement!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pooh

>>>>>
>>>>> LOL, fellow public servants, each of who has their axe to
>>>>> grind.... oh
>>>>> and the fact they MUST be right because their opinion agreed
>>>>> with
>>>>> yours. Over all I will say there is little if any more waste in
>>>>> the
>>>>> public sector than there is in the private.

>>>>
>>>> Overall, then, you'd be an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> Two different scenarios...
>>>>
>>>> 1: You have plenty of money. The money does NOT depend on your
>>>> performance. It will always be there when you fuck up, and
>>>> there's always plenty more where it came from. You *have* to find
>>>> things to *spend* it on!

>>>
>>> A Bank? Insurance Company?
>>>

>>
>> ? wtf are you on about?
>>

>>>> 2: You have to produce a profit. You don't do that, you lose.
>>>> Game over.

>>>
>>> Small businesses make sure that the profits they make are small, so
>>> as to minimise taxation - and some property companies are
>>> deliberately set up to make a loss for many years to be offset
>>> against other income. A government department knows that its future
>>> can be nmeasured in three year segments, or even less. If it is not
>>> producing what the politicians and the country want, it will be
>>> re-organised out of existence - and a CEO in the Government knows
>>> that his next job depends on tis one being a success. How many
>>> Government departments have not had a reordanisation (with many
>>> senior staff changing) over the last 10 to 20 years?
>>>

>>
>> Small businesses profits are small because of government compliance
>> costs and taxes.
>>
>> Government departments know that if they need more money they can
>> use any halfbaked excuse and get more. Can you name a single
>> Government Department that has disappeared in the last 10, 20 , 30
>> years? Now name the new ones and justify them.
>>
>> Yor just being a straw man again Rich
>>

>>>>
>>>> Now you tell me which produces more waste... Govt bureaucracies
>>>> or private enterprise?

>>>
>>> Definately private enterprise in some areas - for a start they are
>>> fragmented, inefficient users of capital, and importantly will not
>>> have or make capital available for major projects - Rail would be a
>>> good example
>>>

>>
>> In some areas. Private enterprise can't afford waste! They havn't got
>> taxpayers money to call on like govt. They can't bang another tax on
>> stuff to raise more money.
>>

>>>> It just cannot be argued that govt is more clever, efficient,
>>>> cost-effective and honest at business than private enterprise is.

>>>
>>> Perhaps not more, but definitely as clever, efficient,
>>> cost-effective and honest. Invested in a Finance Company produce
>>> recently Lazy-fear?
>>>

>>
>> Might be clever but efficient and cost-effective is a bloody lie
>> backed up by the main liar Clarke!
>>

>>>> Govt isn't even a business in the first place. They are a
>>>> *redistribution* agency.

>>>
>>> As are most companies.

>>
>> Can you back this claim up?
>>
>> Pooh
>>

> Yes. Its exactly the same argument as you used to back up government
> benig a redistribution agency.