this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
2263 points (98.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

6024 readers
2361 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AIhasUse@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well, my whole point is that just that government doesn't usually do as good at running things as private companies. Another big example would be NASA vs. SpaceX. I think it is much easier to come up with examples of private companies getting more bang for their buck than governments. My hunch would be that it has to do with profit incentives. Government workers generally get a set salary whereas private companies stand to gain a whole lot more if they have big innovations.

Also, oftentimes, there is an incentive for government agencies to get involved in worse deals if it means siphoning money off to friends, whereas this makes less sense in private companies.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Well, again. Show me an example of a private company that is comparable to the United States military.

In the case of space x. It is precisely space x’s ability to waste money that made it so that it could do the research and development.

NASA would never be allowed to test and blow up ten rockets to build a new space ship.

Your own examples are proving you wrong

And now you are just rambling

[–] AIhasUse@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

Yeah, the freedom to research is a good thing and leads to increased efficiency. SpaceX was able to make reusable rockets in a fraction of the time that NASA has been around. It's astonishing how badly you want to cling to this narrative that governments run highly efficient organizations. This isn't even something that people generally debate about. NASA is literally hiring SpaceX to make their rockets because they are so much better at it. Your stance is that Billy is better at making burgers than Sally and yet Billy is literally buying Sally's burgers instead of making their own. The issue is that you came into discussion with a conclusion, and now that you are trying to justify it, it's just slipping between your fingers. There's no shame in taking some time to rethink things if it's not adding up.