Higher cost if you just compare salary? Would the cost be higher if you factored in having to pay retirement benefits of the government worker?
People like you are amazing.... You're so far gone and you don't even realize it. Literally shilling and excuse-making for every vile thing Trump (and now Elmo) has ever done. "It's good to publicly lie about covid. There are valid reasons every business he's run was fraudulent. His grotesque serial adultery isn't so bad because of some dude 30 years ago! There's really good reasons to just fire everyone, and also end all US aid even if both could be done in an otherwise orderly way, that wouldn't cost thousands of lives. It's good!!" Get ready to pimp for him selling out Ukraine to Russia. Shoot, you'd probably shill and lie for him about being an adjudicated sexual assaulter and the only sitting POTUS in US history to try not to peacefully transfer power. Oh, wait....
If the jobs aren't needed or redundant, get rid of them. No issues. However, if they are needed and a benefit to society it's hard to believe outsourcing low wage park jobs will be cheaper no matter how you sell it. These aren't six figure DC jobs. Unless the outsourcing company is hiring cheap illegals, it is hard to see how labor costs are gonna be cheaper. Of course you also need to add in the outsourcing company's markup for profits.
With the national parks their goal is probably to just make the park going experience as miserable as possible for the public, and perhaps to justify closing some off so they can auction the lands off to their pals.
These “low wage” park jobs come with all the benefits that government workers have such as pensions and health insurance. So outsourcing, you can pay more and still save money.
So more jobs with no health insurance? Nice. Wonder who will sign up for that. Also, you're conveniently overlooking the profits of the outsourcing company. They're not taking the job for free.
Plus if they are even more understaffed, it increases the risk of yahoos trashing them. Rangers are not just greeters and tour guides, they are law enforcement.
Whether health insurance is provided is up to the company that hires the people. Since they wouldn’t be government employees, the government would have that expense. Clearly you don’t understand the concept of outsourcing
So how much would this company charge the government? Less than the cost of salary and benefits? Why would a company take that contract? Clearly, you don't understand the concept of business.
no, the company would probably charge more. The savings is long term savings when the government doesnt have to pay 30 years of pension payments. This concept is no different than the current 'deferred resignation'. The government will pay people to sit at home for 8 months doing nothing. That seems like a waste of money until you look at the long term savings.
So why should the government value money now as less valuable than money 30 years from now? Also, include the fact that the government withholds current salary to help fund at least part of it as well.
The govt only “saves money” on outsourcing if the contract pays less than the total compensation of (in this case a Park Ranger). So assuming they want the level of service to stay the same at national parks (a decidedly NOT safe assumption), the govt only saves money if the contract costs less than the “total compensation” of the park ranger. So let’s say that $33k/yr park ranger truly costs taxpayers something like $60k/yr. The govt could contract with a 3rd party to do the job, yes. That posters point is merely that the 3rd party takes a slice off the top before they even hire anybody. So you hypothetically undercut the current cost by doing it via outsourcing, the contractor takes a slice of the top before hiring people with less or no benefits. There’s basically no universe the park ranger “makes more” as you implied in post #26.
Why even attempt to explain things to these insufferable people? I appreciate your posts but I hope you don’t wear out from the dealings of the dishonest part of the board. They aren’t interested in honest discourse.
and how much is the government paying for 0 work when that park ranger retires? Or are you assuming the person dies on the job?
then renegotiate gubmt employee contracts to get rid of the pension benefits. don't just outsource it to MAGA donor #34 so he can provide chitty service at 95% of the cost and take the profit off the back of the underpaid labor while the consumer (the taxpayer) gets rotten service
You cant outsource park rangers for less money genius. Those jobs are already filled with low paid employees because those people see it as, not just a job, but a way to give back or contribute and they settle for less money than they can get in the free marketplace. There is a thread about Trump lobbying for Andrew Tate the sex trafficking criminal's freedom that you should scurry over to and stand up for Trump there too.
