| reply to nasadude
Re: Good move Well a better solution would be to hire contractors that do the job right the first time.. This would save exponentially more money than pay freezes for upper govt. I got a friend that does subcontracting and one of his projects was government waste and safety. They sure piss away a lot of money. |
|
DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | said by jc100:Well a better solution would be to hire contractors that do the job right the first time.. This would save exponentially more money than pay freezes for upper govt. I got a friend that does subcontracting and one of his projects was government waste and safety. They sure piss away a lot of money. Contracting is not the solution for quality nor is it the solution to saving money. And if you aren't willing to agree that military contracting is a huge example, let's take a simpler one: contractor Bobby Ross, paid $700K/yr as Army's football coach while "leading" the team to a 3-9 season.
»www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.d···SPORTS01 |
|
| reply to jc100
Actually I have seen contractors do an even worse job than the govt employees in some cases.
I agree with the wasteful spending. I saw it a ton of wasteful spending for projects the govt would start and than cut it off half way through. Thus making what was complete useless since it was only half completed.
Things that need to change are on both sides.
Govt had to many "chefs and not enough indians" plus they had incompetent employees in decision making roles.
Some of the contract companies I worked for had executives trying to micro manage and make decisions on technology that they had no clue about. |
|
| reply to DonLibes
I Think you misread my post. I am saying since the government contracts substantially, hiring people who do the job right the first time is essential. Often times, government subcontractors outsource to other contractors, and the quality is shit. The government would save EXPONENTIALLY by making sure those they hire have a consistent record of getting things done on time and in good fashion. |
|
| reply to raptor1418
See above on what I meant by hiring contractors right the first time. IE Making sure those they use have a good and consistent record and performance. Often, these contractors outsource and so on. You want to make sure you get one who does the job properly, or you're left with a mess and a lot of paperwork figuring out who to go often.
As for wasteful spending in the government, its endemic. Money grows on trees, didn't you know. Tax payer money is the unlimited cash cow for whatever stupid or half assed project someone wishes to fund today. Change is needed, but it won't happy. Too many of our politicians today got jobs lined up with the very companies who lobby them daily. If they cut off the pork to these companies, where will their millions come from after leaving office = /. |
|
DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | reply to jc100
said by jc100:I Think you misread my post. I am saying since the government contracts substantially, hiring people who do the job right the first time is essential. Often times, government subcontractors outsource to other contractors, and the quality is shit. The government would save EXPONENTIALLY by making sure those they hire have a consistent record of getting things done on time and in good fashion. You're right, I missed that part of your post. My apologies. |
|
| Np. But either which way, waste seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Quite a shame. Would be nice if our government could be fiscally sound like so many others. Several countries in Eastern Europe have balanced budgets and high qualities of life. Sweden is a gleaming example. So why can't we do this? |
|
