|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jul 9, 2010 11:02:45 GMT -5
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 9, 2010 11:19:28 GMT -5
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but why is "privatizing" emissions inspections controversial?
Doesn't that basically mean that any auto shop can become certified and perform emissions inspections? I thought that's how most states did it already. That's how Virginia does it. We don't seem to have any problems. Why does some state office need to do that?
Come to think of it, I don't really have problems with any of the "privatization" proposals in that article. I had four years of lousy Marriott food at Georgetown. Why can't prisoners have the same?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jul 9, 2010 11:23:32 GMT -5
Hey, lets speak in sweeping generalizations and over-simplified idiocy. I could do that too, but I stopped doing so in, say, the fifth grade. Seriously, most of the services listed in that article can and should be done by private entities, and, as pointed, are in many other states. |
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Jul 9, 2010 13:00:54 GMT -5
Wait a second, there are currently no privately run pre-schools in Jersey?!? Really?? Talk about literally being a nanny state.
On a personal note, becoming a state emissions inspector was the dream job for one of my high school classmates. You collect a decent salary for sitting on your bum for 40 hours a week flipping a switch from green light to red light and back again, and best of all people keep bringing you extra cartons of cigarettes and cases of beer just out of the goodness of their hearts.
The private sector would totally screw that up!!! Thank goodness for dedicated public servants or we would all be lost.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Jul 9, 2010 13:06:36 GMT -5
The part I don't get about the original article is why Christie wants to privatize revenue generating functions like emissions + tollbooths under the guise of saving money.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Jul 9, 2010 13:08:56 GMT -5
Does this allow me to pump my own gas in NJ now?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2010 13:10:45 GMT -5
Am I missing something, or aren't the car inspections already privately run (albeit on state-owned property)?
"The proposal would require breaking the state’s contract with Parsons Corp., which is two years into a five-year, $276 million deal to do emissions and mechanical inspections..."
Parsons executing on a government contract doesn't make it a government entity, does it?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 9, 2010 13:28:14 GMT -5
The part I don't get about the original article is why Christie wants to privatize revenue generating functions like emissions + tollbooths under the guise of saving money. Those would still be revenue generating functions. It doesn't say it in the article, but there's no way New Jersey would give up all revenue from emissions fees and highway tolls. The revenues would be lower, sure, since they'd be sharing them with the private company, but then again, the state's O&M expense would be reduced to zero. |
|
