|
Shaggar posted:\ so do governments. organizational inefficiency is directly proportional to the size of the organization and has nothing to do with public vs private.
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:52 |
|
|
the government actually has no reason to control costs since there are no penalties for high government spending and every reason in the world to promise people who vote for you that you will spend money on them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:its not theft in the least. its exactly what those legislators wanted for their districts. this is one of the more true things shaggar has said i think
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
i still think a single payer option is the only way to make it work for real though
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:insurance companies have a clear motive to decrease costs and when it comes to profits most are already regulated wrt the amount of profit they're allowed to make. oh hello tori how's the work at your nonprofit this morning
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the government actually has no reason to control costs since there are no penalties for high government spending and every reason in the world to promise people who vote for you that you will spend money on them. there's also effectively no penalty to just denying claims either and that fulfills their "keep costs low " interest
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the government actually has no reason to control costs since there are no penalties for high government spending sure there are. there's also plenty of reasons that the supposed incentive for private companies to decrease costs is a fallacy as well. Sure, it's there. But there's lots of other factors at work. Just like with the govt. large organizations are inefficient, full stop, and if you disagree, you've either never worked in a large organization or you've never been exposed to executive decision making processes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
I'd say that there are probably more penalties for going over budget as a typical government agency than there are at the average for-profit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
rotor posted:sure there are. have you ever used the services of a large business but became frustrated because they were slow or messed stuff up? the answer is yes, because we all have. we've all used a private non-government large business that made us want to tear our eyeballs out - cable companies, phone companies, car companies, the list is endless if you work for a large company, you can guarantee that your company is wasteful. even small businesses waste money. who hasn't seen a company they work for waste money they know could be better spent elsewhere? so large businesses aren't that incredibly efficient and they are wasteful, just like governments can be. yes, in terms of requiring revenue to operate, a business is like a government but governments don't have to generate a profit, and their end goals are completely different
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
rotor posted:you've never been exposed to executive decision making processes. its simple! 1. stuff quarters into your butt hole 2. fart while standing over a large empty floor 3. count how many are heads. even number, do plan a, odd number do plan b.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
maniacdevnull posted:its simple! the free-est market
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
maniacdevnull posted:its simple! no, it's more like "Which of these choices will most benefit the tiny empire I've built within this company?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the government actually has no reason to control costs since there are no penalties for high government spending and every reason in the world to promise people who vote for you that you will spend money on them. i mean in theory yes the government could spend a ton on anything but in practice so many people have gotten elected on a platform of "controlling wasteful spending!" that that the laws involved with government procurement are actually aggressively tilted toward "don't pay one cent more than absolutely required". often to the point of being penny wise and pound foolish when you consider the extra time and administrative load involved. rotor posted:I'd say that there are probably more penalties for going over budget as a typical government agency than there are at the average for-profit. kick a contract to your buddy in the private sector and get fired if caught, do the same in government and the DoJ gets involved. also it is harder to hide because everything involved is public or subject to FOIA requests and the other bidders are watching you like a hawk.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
rotor posted:no, it's more like "Which of these choices will most benefit the tiny empire I've built within this company?" Yeah but they have no idea how to evaluate which is the one to do that so they normally resort to quarterly reporting as ive outlined above
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
speaking of waste it would probably just save everyone a lot of time to ban shaggar from talking about politics on pain of being forced to argue with cremnob on why aapl is a bad buy
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
this is really bad. gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
i'm going to counter that loving terrible link with a gawker link http://valleywag.gawker.com/startup-founder-hacks-investor-s-voicemail-in-attempt-t-1651252437quote:It's hard to cast a better clusterfuck—or a worse caricature of Silicon Valley hustle—than what happened to tech investor Jason Calacanis. "Someone hacked my voicemail and changed my outgoing message to get me to invest," he wrote on Instagram yesterday, along with a recording of the new message.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
rotor posted:sure there are. no there arent. theres literally no reason for the federal government to decrease spending other then "well these tea partiers don't like it!" and you just need to toss them a little penny pinching anti-welfare crap while you approve the latest a multi-billion dollar Lockheed contract. also more than anything my primary opposition to single payer is based on the timing. healthcare in this country is totally hosed at the provider level and we need to fix that before we talk about throwing money at it. if we switch to single payer without fixing poo poo then its all gonna get swept under the rug and the system will fall apart as the boomers flow through it like the diseased garbage they are. if we fix things and then want to go to single payer, fine. whatever. we'll all be 100 years dead by the time that happens though. Shifty Pony posted:i mean in theory yes the government could spend a ton on anything but in practice so many people have gotten elected on a platform of "controlling wasteful spending!" that that the laws involved with government procurement are actually aggressively tilted toward "don't pay one cent more than absolutely required". often to the point of being penny wise and pound foolish when you consider the extra time and administrative load involved. quote:kick a contract to your buddy in the private sector and get fired if caught, do the same in government and the DoJ gets involved. also it is harder to hide because everything involved is public or subject to FOIA requests and the other bidders are watching you like a hawk. transparency doesn't matter if no one cares that we don't need f22s or f35s. this isn't about corruption its about making legitimate and completely legal legislative decisions to spend money on poo poo we don't need. when im talking about overspend in single payer im talking about legitimate payments for things that are overpriced because of provider incompetence. not only is it a waste of money but it also hides the real problems with patient care that are the source of a lot of these costs. There are parts of the ACA that start to address this by penalizing providers for poor quality metrics and its a great start, I just wish they wouldn't bundle quality reform in with payment reform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:no there arent. theres literally no reason for the federal government to decrease spending other then "well these tea partiers don't like it!" and you just need to toss them a little penny pinching anti-welfare crap while you approve the latest a multi-billion dollar Lockheed contract. i hope that one day the government runs everything thus rendering private business obsolete
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Werthog 95 posted:this is really bad. gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:i hope that one day the government runs everything thus rendering private business obsolete I'm gonna nationalize dat rear end
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
guys, private industry is head and shoulders more efficient when it comes to allocating resources and cutting costs than any government agency *writes off $6.2 billion acquisition of aquantive* *writes off $900 million of unsold surface 1 inventory* *buys nokia for $7.2 billion* heh. stupid money-wasting bureaucrats
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Werthog 95 posted:this is really bad. gently caress you. she's into vidjagames and i think falling for the same mental trap that a lot of those involved are getting caught in by viewing the blowback against the misogynistic assholes it as a personal attack on them. but one thing that she kinda hits on is that gawker and all of these new media groups pretty much only exist by bouncing from inflammatory position to inflammatory position. the demographics look really really tempting but you are playing with fire by associating with them. especially because if you do something they don't like and pull your ads these media outlets have the will to poison your company with the exact same demographic you were targeting in a way that old media like newspaper and tv wouldn't do. basically don't just slather ads everywhere without thinking. Werthog 95 posted:i'm going to counter that loving terrible link with a gawker link http://valleywag.gawker.com/startup-founder-hacks-investor-s-voicemail-in-attempt-t-1651252437 lol. biting the hand that feeds you is so disruptive. Shifty Pony fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Oct 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:she's into vidjagames and i think falling for the same mental trap that a lot of those involved are getting caught in by viewing the blowback against the misogynistic assholes it as a personal attack on them. the actual problem with putting ads on gawker is the audience associating the quality of your product with the quality of the content on the website, not whether or not they take an inflammatory position.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
healthcare is just one of those things too important to be left up to market forces and profit motive, you know? idk how we can have industry subsidies and not a basic system of care for all people in the country. poo poo, even let dental and optical be their own market, but there are too many medical bankruptcies for this poo poo. single payer would also let gov control the crazy drug prices we get charged as a subsidy for the rest of the world
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:poo poo, even let dental and optical be their own market this bugs the hell outta me like your eyes and teeth aren't part of your body and therefore aren't included in "healthcare"
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:the actual problem with putting ads on gawker is the audience associating the quality of your product with the quality of the content on the website, not whether or not they take an inflammatory position. but that has already been a thing for a long time in the print and tv world. surely they wouldn't be stupid enough to think it wouldn't be a thing online? if advertisers start thinking long and hard about the quality of the medium affecting their brand perceptions, where does that leave 99.99% of in app ads?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:but that has already been a thing for a long time in the print and tv world. surely they wouldn't be stupid enough to think it wouldn't be a thing online? i'm the preponderance of home gym ads on the scifi channel
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:no there arent. theres literally no reason for the federal government to decrease spending other then "well these tea partiers don't like it!" departmental budgets get cut all the time so I really have no idea what the gently caress you're talking about
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:if advertisers start thinking long and hard about the quality of the medium affecting their brand perceptions, where does that leave 99.99% of in app ads? 99.99% of app ads come from extremely shady third party brokers the last time i was involved in that space, we served filler content for most of our mobile impressions because it was impossible to sell space directly to brands, but the third party brokers could only rarely serve ads that would meet our requirements e.g. no porn, no obvious scams (needless to say those apps lost money hand over fist, but MOBILE FIRST!!!!!!!) Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Oct 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:no there arent. theres literally no reason for the federal government to decrease spending other then "well these tea partiers don't like it!" did you miss the part where "these tea partiers" have a death grip on the budget process?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:i'm the preponderance of home gym ads on the scifi channel and gold ads on fox news.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:did you miss the part where "these tea partiers" have a death grip on the budget process? yeah they're always cutting medicare and social security. just all the time. it never causes budget overruns or anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:and gold ads on fox news. i walk by the lifelock offices omw to the train station each time i think about how all of those computers and computermen are paid from scamming olds via limbaugh ads
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:and gold ads on fox news. reverse mortgage/medigap insurance policies/mobility scooters/mail-order catheters/boner pills/asbestos lawsuits hmmm i wonder what their target demographic might be?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
when I worked at zonealarm lifelock approached us about doing a bundle deal and everyone who looked at their service was like  nope
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:single payer would also let gov control the crazy drug prices we get charged as a subsidy for the rest of the world they already could but don't because congress is corrupt as gently caress doesn't make shaggar right I mean he is right in that providers waste a fuckton of time and money but it's actually in dealing with useless shitbag insurance companies
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
actually most of it is in poor patient care due to complete lack of process controls. the insurance poo poo is an insane copout from them not being able to understand the EHR they spent millions on and constantly trying different procedure codes to extract the most possible money from a patient.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:i walk by the lifelock offices omw to the train station remember when the life lock guy taunted people by saying his identity could never be stolen. then it was stolen hours later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:52 |
|
|
qirex posted:when I worked at zonealarm lifelock approached us about doing a bundle deal and everyone who looked at their service was like what the hell do they even do? all i know is that they watch your credit report to see if anybody opened a credit card in your name, which, uh, just freeze your credit
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 19:59
|
|