"Tim Bedding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked: >> Aww Dr. Tame, you're such a hard-liner. :-) I'd go for >> just privatizing it and allowing competition.
>Competition can only improve things if there are >significant inefficiencies. >This takes us back to searching for a list of identified >efficiency changes in FDA. >Do you, or Bill, have a proven list? I think there's a misconception here that's fostering confusion, originating with the idea of "privatizing [FDA] and allowing competition". FDA is a police agency. Its police functions could not be privatized, nor could they be done competitively. The question is whether those police functions are justified at all, not whether they're efficiently carried out. Some of the investigative functions pursuant to FDA's police actions COULD be privatized and done competitively, but for non-police purposes. Could those be done more efficiently than FDA does? Probably, but that's not a question of great importance; the competition would simply drive out inefficiencies as they cropped up, but even if they were done less efficiently than FDA has done, the gains in non-monetary terms would be enormous. In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
