Efficiency and correctness are not the same thing.
FYI - most of your government, wherever you are from, is run by bureaucratic edict, not by political means.
The heads of government agencies often wield immense power and have no need to respond to voters interest because there's effectively too much 'on the ballot' so to speak, and too much mundane detail for voters to understand.
An technical that transcends agencies though ... my god man.
The government of Canada's (and probably the US as well) IT situation is a massive mess, there's no consistency across organizations, there's no concept of identity management across entities, let alone for the general public. Nothing is integrated, nothing works. You can have a doctor examine you in one place and it's very difficult to get your medical history across to a different entity. Try even finding a doctor? Who's available? Who's not? My health is at risk, I want to know where I can get a doctor? Nope. Shut up, we can't figure that out, it's too hard - go to a clinic and just see whoever is on duty - is the only answer. I would vote for a bunch of ex-Google PM's and Engineers to literally take over my nations IT (especially in Health) to simplify and scale it. Or at least to have it under the control of one entity.
Modern society is just big and complex, no matter how hard we wish that weren’t the case.
Who is advocating that? Nobody. I didn't even infer that.
What I want is some highly talented and organized people, like those from Google, to take over IT for Healthcare in Canada, and then shift our non-existent IT solutions over to something that works. Because right now it's a non-existent bureaucratic mess.
"Modern society is just big and complex, no matter how hard we wish that weren’t the case"
I didn't say it wasn't.
But that doesn't mean that many governments aren't supremely inefficient in many areas. Canadian Healthcare IT being a big one.
CGI, a Canadian IT company spent $2B making the Obamacare sign up website - something a handful of Google Engineers had to come in and fix. They basically wrote much of it from scratch.
No you didn't. Toyg did. You implied it (arguably)
I have seen that happening (not with Googlers, not at a national level) within my province/state and now everyone has to deal with an inefficient global IT management service that is borderline useless and has the "know-it-all" syndrome.
YMMV.
(My department managed to be the rebel over the years and we have our own setup but it's slowly getting taken away from us.)
A more correct formulation would have read:
> is run by bureaucratic edit within the boundaries set by lawmakers.
Between this and recent nationalist movements, I'm concerned that our generation will be responsible for a regression in progress.
And what does this have to do with Nationalism? Nothing.
Someone suggests something not normative and people yell 'Trump'?
Consider how South Korea, Japan, France, UK, Germany, Poland, Belgium were re-built after the war?
It was mostly centrally planned management by powers, taking a lot of orders from Washington. 'post war' is a great opportunity for central power as most of the value creating enterprises are obvious, and very low hanging fruit: i.e. 'we need schools, and roads, and electricity where all that has been undone'.
Nobody is suggesting totalitarianism, some people just point out that in many cases, a well organized and efficient control system is much better than bureaucratic kludge.
In Democracies, pushing through such changes has to be a nightmare - so many competing interests, populism, you have to find the right legislative window, legislation is burdened with irrelevant stuff, bureaucracies are resistant to change etc..