Comments by "" (@charliemoore2551) on "Is the state really as inefficient as people claim?" video.

There is always a tension between efficiency and effectiveness. A business only has to make a profit. To achieve that, it targets a certain sector of the market and tailors its operation to serve it well enough so that its customers don't go elsewhere. The underlying assumption is that those who do not fit into this sector will be looked after by another business which serves them best. In practice, this almost works. That is to say, it is not so dysfunctional that everything falls apart completely. But such a system is nowhere near good enough to provide essential services. A hospital cannot care for 60% of the "market" on the assumption that other hospitals will care for the other 40%. And what about sanitation? Provision of roads and bridges? Law and order? Sit and think about it for 10 minutes and you'll have a very long list indeed. The services that the public sector provides have to successfully reach everyone. There is no alternative public provider to fill "gaps" in the market. As a result, there are bound to be instances of inefficiency. For example, it's obviously cheaper to provide services to people in a city than it is to those who live in scattered villages or farms. But if society needs the input of the people concerned in order to function, then it's a cost that needs to be socially met.
1