What's so great about government programs?

[TooFarTampa]

Certainly true, some states do a great job of running their universities.

But these schools are not the best of the best - Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT, Columbia, CalTech, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Brown.. these are the best schools in the United States, and in most cases, the world, and they are all private. Which isn't to say that the state schools you list aren't good, they just aren't as good as institutions operated in the private sector.

The university system is a great example though of what might become of our healthcare system - a majority of Americans rely on public systems, while the financially or cognitively elite attend the top notch private institutions. Is that an acceptable outcome for healthcare? Would you mind being priced out of the best medical institutions in the country based on your income?

You seem to imply that all private colleges and universities are better than all public universities, and that is just not true. Would you, in general, rather hire a UCLA grad or a Pepperdine grad? Our current university system provides accessibility to many people, including those who want higher education but can't afford private and those who want the experience of a larger school. Everybody's different and the mix offers an amazing amount of CHOICE, and as SWGB pointed out it sure helps to have government-backed student loans that are low cost but very difficult to get rid of without paying them off in full.

On a local level, a year ago we chose our very well-run neighborhood public school over the very pricey and competitive-to-get-into private school we were in, partly after a cost-benefit analysis but mostly because the new school is a better fit for our family. We are thrilled and not at all regretful. Of course, a better socioeconomic status usually will get you better parental involvement and thus, better teachers are attracted to it, which is another issue all together ...

It's really about balance. Government should make programs more accessible and provide a check to unfettered free market capitalism. I firmly believe that health care is a special case. I have never understood why we allow things like for-profit hospital companies with shareholders, for-profit hospice or for-profit health insurance companies. The outside companies that work with health care (big Pharma, etc) and innovate should be private and competition oriented so that the best products are what get to the patient, but inside the health care system it should be entirely nonprofit. I can see that physicians should be able to charge what is appropriate based on a free market ideal (ie the best ones charge more) but hospitals top-heavy with administrators trying to turn a profit for shareholders is, frankly, disgusting.

We are not going to get that this time around, and I'm not sure if we can ever get to that point. Those who do profit so richly will not allow it. There is very little balance to this system and I am all for any way to provide it -- whether it's a "trigger" option or something else.

 

[kkddbb]

I don't think the service of Fedex or UPS is any better than USPS. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. I've never had a problem with mail service. Lots of things I order online come by mail.

my company uses them all daily and believe me, youve been lucky.

 

[beachmouse]

On direct lending, student loans are through private lenders with a guarantee from government which insures that if you default, the government picks up the tab. You are serviced through private businesses however. This has little to do with the performance of government programs.

Direct lending is just that- loans directly from the Department of Education without going through a bank. All my grad school loans and about half the spouse's were through the direct lending program.

And if you pick a metric, the direct loan program is superior to the private lender route- more cost-effective for both the government and students and generally providing superior customer service.

As for the universities, my old grad program from a public university is #3 in the country according to the widely-used US News Rankings. The only schools ahead of it are Harvard and the public Cal.

 

[Mango]

Certainly true, some states do a great job of running their universities.

But these schools are not the best of the best - Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT, Columbia, CalTech, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Brown.. these are the best schools in the United States, and in most cases, the world, and they are all private. Which isn't to say that the state schools you list aren't good, they just aren't as good as institutions operated in the private sector.

The university system is a great example though of what might become of our healthcare system - a majority of Americans rely on public systems, while the financially or cognitively elite attend the top notch private institutions. Is that an acceptable outcome for healthcare? Would you mind being priced out of the best medical institutions in the country based on your income?

All given large donations by past graduates, the likes of the principals of Blackwater, to continue their indoctrination of the elite and maintain the status quo of the old boys club.

 

[GoodWitch58]

While these colleges and universities may be "private" in tuition and governance, I think one would not have to look hard to find that many of their research projects and research staff are funded by such agencies as the National Science Foundation; the National Institutes of Health; the Public Health Service; Homeland Security, et al.

 

[Matt J]

Please do.

A few comments - first, as far as USPS goes, wouldn't you agree the quality of service compared to private firms is sorely lacking? Second, how much do you pay to support USPS through federal taxes beyond what you pay for a stamp? How much do we (as in, all of the U.S.) pay combined? How much do we pay for FedEx?

On direct lending, student loans are through private lenders with a guarantee from government which insures that if you default, the government picks up the tab. You are serviced through private businesses however. This has little to do with the performance of government programs.

On Homeland Security - no issues there, that one is even in the Constitution, and they do seem to do a relatively good job.

On NOAA - ditto, useful service. They also do a lot of basic research private firms would never pay for that is very valuable over the long term. (Maybe BeachSIO2 could comment on this further?)

Um I can assure from first hand experience that Direct Lending is government money and not private banks. SallieMae, the largest and almost last, private student loan company does utilize monies from banks to provide federally guaranteed student loans.

In fact SallieMae would probably be the perfect example of a well run government program being privatized and going down the toilet in a matter of less than 10 years. SallieMae is currently on the brink of collapse and got themselves there using risky loan programs. In fact they've been on the news lately begging locals to call their representatives in congress so they can stay afloat. By this I mean they don't want the Direct Lending program expanded because it will eventually destroy them.

They have used deception throughout their existence. In fact the current save our local jobs pitch is total BS since about 500 of the 700 employees they currently have a seasonal and will be laid off within the next month. They really try to fire most of them first so they don't qualify for unemployment benefits, that is of course if they didn't get laid off before the 6 month minimum to qualify for unemployment.

I know I got derailed there, but I always forget what a lovely example of privatizing government going horrible bad SallieMae is.

 

[30ashopper]

National Park Service

Rural Electrification Administration

(This is another loan program)

Public Libraries

Reasonable example, they don't make a lot of money in most cases, so private investment is rare.

Public Health Service

That's rather broad based, but the largest programs are currently some of the programs Congress is trying to fix due to massive cost over runs. Not a good example generally when your advocating new, costly departments under this administration.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

IMHO a horrible example. NHTSA isn't so much owned and controlled by us, it's controlled by special interests.

Department of Agriculture

USDA

Your definition of "government that works" and mine are two completely different definitions. ;-)

Public Schools

Probably should be spun off as another thread. Clearly our public school system has major issues.

Veterans Administration

Have you ever actually had to deal with this institution? Can you give some examples of how well run it is?

FEMA (pre Bush)

You just lost your argument. :roll:

We could go on with some research, but I believe a good point has been brought up. Conservatives constantly tell the American people that government doesn't work but we know better. It's not perfect but it can work for us and we will strive to make it better for everyone. A politician telling you this country can't do anything right should never be re-elected.

Hence the point of this thread.

 

[30ashopper]

While these colleges and universities may be "private" in tuition and governance, I think one would not have to look hard to find that many of their research projects and research staff are funded by such agencies as the National Science Foundation; the National Institutes of Health; the Public Health Service; Homeland Security, et al.

Their budgets are in the millions, it's really quite small. (Which honestly I disagree with, I'd spend more on basic research.)

 

[30ashopper]

Direct lending is just that- loans directly from the Department of Education without going through a bank. All my grad school loans and about half the spouse's were through the direct lending program.

And if you pick a metric, the direct loan program is superior to the private lender route- more cost-effective for both the government and students and generally providing superior customer service.

As for the universities, my old grad program from a public university is #3 in the country according to the widely-used US News Rankings. The only schools ahead of it are Harvard and the public Cal.

I stand correctd, I wasn't aware of that. I'm curious though how are they more cost effective than private loans? Also, can you give an example of the superior service you received?

 

[30ashopper]

Um I can assure from first hand experience that Direct Lending is government money and not private banks. SallieMae, the largest and almost last, private student loan company does utilize monies from banks to provide federally guaranteed student loans.

In fact SallieMae would probably be the perfect example of a well run government program being privatized and going down the toilet in a matter of less than 10 years. SallieMae is currently on the brink of collapse and got themselves there using risky loan programs. In fact they've been on the news lately begging locals to call their representatives in congress so they can stay afloat. By this I mean they don't want the Direct Lending program expanded because it will eventually destroy them.

They have used deception throughout their existence. In fact the current save our local jobs pitch is total BS since about 500 of the 700 employees they currently have a seasonal and will be laid off within the next month. They really try to fire most of them first so they don't qualify for unemployment benefits, that is of course if they didn't get laid off before the 6 month minimum to qualify for unemployment.

I know I got derailed there, but I always forget what a lovely example of privatizing government going horrible bad SallieMae is.

SallieMae was a GSE, just like Freddie and Fannie. Being a GSE or not a GSE doesn't appear to have had much affect on stability through this downturn.