As government revenues shrink, governments are cutting budgets drastically. In one way, this makes a lot of sense. However, in their rush to cut budgets, some politicians are throwing sense out the window. These are those calling for "across the board budget cuts" or "everyone must feel the pain". I don't think they would do the same with their family budgets.
If anyone's income is cut, it is difficult to cut every item in the budget. For example, the mortgage and the real estate taxes must be paid in full. The transportation cost to get to and from work must be borne. However, there is certain "discretionary" spending that cannot be cut and certain which should be cut. For example, a family would not cut the kid's milk budget and Dad's beer and cigarette budget by the same percentage. If anything, Dad should give up beer and cigarettes so that the kids can have all the milk they need and so that the house can be kept sufficiently warm for the kids to do their homework well.
So it is with governments. Do you cut the fire department budget the same percentage as you cut the parks budget? If you cut the fire department budget will you have increased response times? If you increase response times, will the average fire damage be greater. If the average fire damage is greater, won't fire insurance premiums be higher? If fire insurance premiums are higher, won't that be an indirect tax? See "Snow, new taxes"
http://magree.blogspot.com/2009/01/snow-new-taxes.html
That is not to say that there aren't ways to reduce costs in an essential service. For example, is perfectly good equipment being replaced because its scheduled life cycle has been reached? If truck tires are being replaced every two years, maybe they should only be replaced if the tread is too low and the walls show cracking.
Another buzzword in cutting government expenses is efficiency. But efficiency in the short term may be inefficient in the long term. Suppose the fire trucks engines' run most efficiently at 25 mph. If the trucks were to run at 25 mph wouldn't that affect the response times. See above. Conversely, if the trucks engines run most efficiently at 55 mph, should they be driven at that speed? Wouldn't that increase the number of accidents involving fire trucks and thus greatly increase response times?
The buzzword should not be efficiency, but effectiveness. Unfortunately, providing effectiveness takes more work than proclaiming one is seeking efficiency.
