• AIhasUse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 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.