Education - Public vs PrivateFollow

Wild idiot uses provoke.

It's not very effective.

wild idiot loses 5 HPs and gains the "Bad Breath" debuff.

Only if we had no concept of how much cars cost or the amount of space necessary to run that store. The reality is, some solutions are difficult, expensive and or long. History has shown that wars are not cheap. Therefore, we have a concept on the prices of war which makes your analogies invalid.

In counter to your example, that's like you being starving and saying "Hmmm.. I'm hungry, I'm going to start off with a Tic-Tac and buy more if I'm still hungry".

You should already have a gauge on how much food it will take to satisfy you and you should start there. Likewise, we know approximately how much money goes into being successful in war and you start there. Just because that number is higher than other things doesn't make it wrong by default.

I never claimed I knew an exact amount. I said we're spending too much on defense and "Well, it's working so far" is a really bad reason to continue doing so.

??? That doesn't contradict my statement.[/quote]
I'm just going to let that sit.

I know I can't do my mission successfully if I don't get new carpeting in my office every year.

I'm just going to let that one sit.

Oh, we're pretending that money isn't spent at the end of the year for the sole purpose of spending money to keep from receiving a reduction in funding for the following fiscal year?

Lol at using relativistic, subjective classifications to try and make an objective argument.

No.. What I'm saying is that I'm sure that there were other areas where that money wouldn't have been considered a waste. Instead, it was mismanaged in order to support the next fiscal year.

Just because money was mismanaged doesn't mean that the money was a surplus. I'm not saying that it weren't, but you can't say unless you see the whole big picture. What we can say is that the money was mismanaged at a certain level. Once all areas are met and money is wasted, then yes, there needs to be a reduction in the overall budget.

No, clearly you don't. This has nothing to do with the quality and everything to do with who purchases something.

An example: I will charge Joe Blow more money for one of my hotel rooms than I will charge a corporate client who stays at my hotel frequently. I will charge the government more money than I charge the corporate client, despite the government having more people stay at my hotel, but I'll still charge them less than I charge Joe Blow.

Everyone gets the same room, none of them pay the same price.

Why will I charge the government more? Because I can. They have bloated budgets and no one is truly held accountable. The same deal works for most products.


My absolute favourite customer though? Relocating military personnel. They'll come in, tell me they need a room for 3-4 weeks, I'll try to negotiate with them and they cut me off saying "I just need a room. I don't care about the cost, the military is paying for it." Oil and gad exploration companies are a pretty close second for the same reason.

So, yes, who the spender is does affect the cost. And it's not just as simple as government versus corporate versus individual. Costs will vary depending on the department spending as well.

I can almost see the dollar signs in your eyes.