View Single Post
Old 09-25-2009, 06:23 PM   #18
brecklundin
Banned
brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.brecklundin is as sexy as a twisted cruller doughtnut.
 
Posts: 1,906
Karma: 15348
Join Date: Jun 2007
Device: mine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amalthia View Post
I think the problem with the government is that you're penalized if you save money. So every department has to use all the money they got or they get less money the next year. As you can see this is a very shortsighted system and does not encourage frugalness which leads to very hard times when tax revenues are down.
very good point...the way budgets are setup does actually penalize a dept/division/whatever if they find ways to not spend as much in a given period.

Still, there is something niggling at the back of my head about this issue from the 70s and I do not remember what it was exactly. I only recall there was something hinky about budget allocations and needing to base them on the current year's expenditures. I wish I could remember, but it does seem there was a big dust-up over the issue here in CA.

I would think a bonus system similar to what many corporations use for project groups might work well in government...as in if they can save money then part of that savings is returned to them as a bonus and the rest dumped into that depts reserve or the state's general reserve.

I am sure there are landmines in this idea and sure it's been thought of before and likely tried but I really cannot recall.
brecklundin is offline   Reply With Quote