Ayn Rand and Objectivism

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

How exactly?

Excessive, unnecessary red tape mainly but coupled with high taxes

[Mich the Tester]

How on earth does forcing someone to pay for something that they have no involvement in and no control over be contributory to the success of a business

"In private businesses, and in companies of a size of 5 or more permanently voting-entitled employees of which 3 are entitled to stand for election, the employees are entitled to elect a works council, according to Industrial Constitution Act (BetrVG). The employer is in no way active in that process. The employer must not hinder or forbid the election but still bears the expenses related to the election as well as all costs that arise through the works council"

I think if you spend a little while travelling around Germany, the UK and the US, you'll get the impression that things are going rather well in Germany. I live near the German border, some of our friends are German business owners; I don't hear them complaining about the works councils.

[Mich the Tester]

Perhaps, but not entirely. Firstly, the inherent inefficiency within the public sector, along with the frustration and waste that it creates, are a part of the reason why some are attracted to shrink-the-state capitalism.

Inefficient compared to what?

Banks?
Software corporations?
Automotive multinationals?
Oil companies?
Insurers?


I've worked in both private and public sectors, in a variety of organisations; I'm sorry, but I don't see the mythical efficiency of the private sector. In most businesses of more than about 3 people, it isn't there.

[sasguru]

I now understand why you have a reputation for being insulting.

My point, which you have ignored (again) was that 50% of the population do not add wealth to the UK because they work for the public sector and that this is unsustainable.

And my point which you are unable or unwilling to understand is that ( ignoring the size and inefficiency issue which we agree on) you can't measure value just by monetary means (or wealth as you put it).
For example if you got sick tomorrow and went to the NHS for an operation, and you got a good doctor who operated on you so that you could back to your private sector job quicky, to create "wealth" - then that doctor has quite directly contributed to the wealth creation.
Or if the guys who maintain motorways do their job well so that private sector sales people can get to where they want then they have directly helped with wealth creation.
Or if a university professor trains up his engineering students well one or two of them may go on to create companies and wealth they would not otherwise be able to.
The list is endless

[sasguru]

Inefficient compared to what?

Banks?
Software corporations?
Automotive multinationals?
Oil companies?
Insurers?


I've worked in both private and public sectors, in a variety of organisations; I'm sorry, but I don't see the mythical efficiency of the private sector. In most businesses of more than about 3 people, it isn't there.

Good point. You could sack about 25%-50% of the bottom performers in any medium to large private company with no ill effect.

[GreenLabel]

I've worked in both private and public sectors, in a variety of organisations; I'm sorry, but I don't see the mythical efficiency of the private sector. In most businesses of more than about 3 people, it isn't there.

You're right, once an organisation gets above a certain size there are elements of bureaucracy that inevitably creep in. That said, I've seen nothing in private companies that compares with what goes on in the public sector.

Without going in to privacy-busting detail, what branch of the public sector did you contract in, if you don't mind me asking? If more than one, did you find that some were worse/better than others?

[GreenLabel]

Good point. You could sack about 25%-50% of the bottom performers in any medium to large private company with no ill effect.

Maybe some companies. I contracted at a fund manager who did exactly that when the crunch came around and they didn't seem to suffer for it. Certainly not my current ClientCo - for around 3,000 staff this place is remarkably streamlined. Rare, especially for a company that makes money hand over fist.

[sasguru]

Having said all of which, it can be argued that any company without a monopoly, that is inefficient, will be found out in the market place unlike the public sector.
So the inefficiency of the public sector is more to the point of what we are discussing. I have no doubt that it needs trimming, and maybe large trimming, but to say that it does not create value is just plain silly.

[GreenLabel]

Having said all of which, it can be argued that any company without a monopoly, that is inefficient, will be found out in the market place unlike the public sector.
So the inefficiency of the public sector is more to the point of what we are discussing. I have no doubt that it needs trimming, and maybe large trimming, but to say that it does not create value is just plain silly.

I can live with that. On another note, do you think that the German balance between socialism/capitalism is the right one? If you ran the place, would you shift it at all?

Genuinely curious, not trying to start some tulip.

[Mich the Tester]

You're right, once an organisation gets above a certain size there are elements of bureaucracy that inevitably creep in. That said, I've seen nothing in private companies that compares with what goes on in the public sector.

Without going in to privacy-busting detail, what branch of the public sector did you contract in, if you don't mind me asking? If more than one, did you find that some were worse/better than others?

I've contracted in the police, provincial government, Dutch water councils and ministries. As for power games,the police were worst, others were OK.

As for what goes on in the private sector not being as bad; I worked in IB and consumer banking in 2006 to 2009 and what I saw was simply disgusting; software being released to production with serious faults that could lose customers' money, simply so that certain managers could get their bonusses for implementing on time. I saw project managers knowingly falsify data from tests, bribes being made to testers, the use of risk models that management knew were fatally flawed, and people being sacked for objecting.

I concluded when the whole sector went belly up in 2008 that it could simply no longer be left lightly regulated; the big problem with the light regulation was that the good guys, i.e. the people who pointed out that things were going wrong, were left on their own and knew their livelihoods were at risk if they spoke out.