What's really going to happen when Wolf becomes governor? (Republic: 2014, school districts)

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by kanling

Both sides have their special interests. I, myself, have special interests and issues I could not care less about. When Wolf is elected, the shift is going to be from the special interests of businesses and farmers and rural areas to the special interests of schools and urban areas.

What Wolf wants and what he can actually get done are different, though. He will certainly succeed on the extraction tax. And I'm sure he will find some way to increase income tax collections in a feel-good way by talking about "middle class" a lot without really defining what that is. He will succeed on getting more state funding for schools, but I don't expect property taxes to be reduced at all, nor do I expect kids to end up with a better education. I'll bet that we also end up with some form of liquor privatization, also done in a feel-good way. Spending on transportation will probably go up, with public transportation probably getting a much bigger increase than road repair. I don't expect any new roads, though.

With increased spending for schools, roads, and public works; we have no guarantee of efficiency. We throw our money into black holes that feed themselves. Once government starts a program they have no means of shutting it down or improving it's productivity. In the private sector businesses fail - the public sector has no such thing. How many years have we been talking about privatizing PA's liquor stores? How long has the Federal Government talked about suspending weekend mail delivery?

[pman]

Fisheye- government entities are not allowed to fail. It is illegal for them to declare bankruptcy which would give them leeway to restructure debt and agreements...so even when they do fail they are required to go on like zombies

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by fisheye

With increased spending for schools, roads, and public works; we have no guarantee of efficiency. We throw our money into black holes that feed themselves. Once government starts a program they have no means of shutting it down or improving it's productivity. In the private sector businesses fail - the public sector has no such thing. How many years have we been talking about privatizing PA's liquor stores? How long has the Federal Government talked about suspending weekend mail delivery?

I don't know why this is made as a point. Government services were never meant to be profitable -- that's why they're public services. Also, public services are much more difficult to tie to outcomes; yes, there could be much more of an effort (and there is) to manage for results and outcomes, but it's not as cut and dried as a factory creating widgets or counting a certain number of customers.

The bottom line is you're thinking of government exclusively through the lens of the private sector, but that is a false comparison. It's apples to oranges.

[pman]

Originally Posted by Duderino

I don't know why this is made as a point. Government services were never meant to be profitable -- that's why they're public services. Also, public services are much more difficult to tie to outcomes; yes, there could be much more of an effort (and there is) to manage for results and outcomes, but it's not as cut and dried as a factory creating widgets or counting a certain number of customers.

The bottom line is you're thinking of government exclusively through the lens of the private sector, but that is a false comparison. It's apples to oranges.

not exactly. if you substitute effectiveness for profit and you have the same idea. in the private sector profit is used as a measure of whether the companies products are desirable and organization efficient. there is a problem in the public sector because this is not the case and yet there are certain outcomes you expect. roads paved, trains to run on time and to be full of people, kids to be educated, etc yet there is no mechanism to stop programs that are not effective in achieving their intended result.

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by pman

not exactly. if you substitute effectiveness for profit and you have the same idea. in the private sector profit is used as a measure of whether the companies products are desirable and organization efficient. there is a problem in the public sector because this is not the case and yet there are certain outcomes you expect. roads paved, trains to run on time and to be full of people, kids to be educated, etc yet there is no mechanism to stop programs that are not effective in achieving their intended result.

Of course it's important to tie outcomes/effectiveness to government programs/operations. However, even with increased accountability and reporting mechanisms that focus on achieving intended results, this apparently is not enough to satisfy many people. Not every benefit can be monetized, but that does not mean that a program does not have a valuable impact.

The fact of the matter is, by their very structure and design, government programs will never turn a profit, so analogizing the private sector to government from a monetary perspective alone just seems silly.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by Duderino

Of course it's important to tie outcomes/effectiveness to government programs/operations. However, even with increased accountability and reporting mechanisms that focus on achieving intended results, this apparently is not enough to satisfy many people. Not every benefit can be monetized, but that does not mean that a program does not have a valuable impact.

The fact of the matter is, by their very structure and design, government programs will never turn a profit, so analogizing the private sector to government from a monetary perspective alone just seems silly.

While government can operate at a loss; taxpayers cannot. We need constraints and we need productivity for of our hard earned dollars. It does none of us any good to simply print more money - that is silly!

We talk about a "free" society - but we enslave the taxpayers. Not every program is a good program and benefits the multitudes. Getting back to our Governor's race; I would love to have a good third party as an alternative. I see very little difference between the donkeys and elephants.

[pman]

Originally Posted by Duderino

Of course it's important to tie outcomes/effectiveness to government programs/operations. However, even with increased accountability and reporting mechanisms that focus on achieving intended results, this apparently is not enough to satisfy many people. Not every benefit can be monetized, but that does not mean that a program does not have a valuable impact.

The fact of the matter is, by their very structure and design, government programs will never turn a profit, so analogizing the private sector to government from a monetary perspective alone just seems silly.

this seems more like an excuse not to measure anything.. as I said, it's not about a profit but about spending money effectively since money is a scarce resource. are we really better off without marijuana tax revenue and spending money on prisons? are there really not programs that are ineffective and would be better spent on mental health which is atrocious? this is the problem with America, one side wants everything cut regardless of merit, the other isn't willing to be honest about whether a program is worthwhile.

[2nd trick op]

The nation's current polarization revolves around a conflict between those who understand, and are connected with the workings of a market-driven economy (concentrating more and more in the smaller "red" states) and the collection of less-motivated, single-issue "spare parts" -- many of whom are still naive enough to believe that surrendering their (and other people's) freedoms to Big Brother can get them what they want.

I have several contacts within the state bureaucracy who hold the view that dwindling state tax revenues are a trend that will likely accelerate as more people find earning opportunities outside the straight-jacket of wage-and-salary-employment and W-2 income.

Wolf's election will merely accelerate Pennsylvania's pace in the "race to the bottom".

[bluecarebear]

Originally Posted by fisheye

We talk about a "free" society - but we enslave the taxpayers. Not every program is a good program and benefits the multitudes. Getting back to our Governor's race; I would love to have a good third party as an alternative. I see very little difference between the donkeys and elephants.

Exactly how I view the educational system. The public schools brainwash these kids to be zombies. Future voters. A third party will never be successful because the government has it set up that way. An argument could be made that we essentially live in a one party system.

PA is too far gone. The state is becoming more blue.

[bluecarebear]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

I have several contacts within the state bureaucracy who hold the view that dwindling state tax revenues are a trend that will likely accelerate as more people find earning opportunities outside the straight-jacket of wage-and-salary-employment and W-2 income.

I have only seen this way out in the rural areas and not in the Pittsburgh region. I say good for them.