The government inefficiency is in doing the small pilot program and using those costs as per filing costs. Of course it's going to cost more if you only do a handful of them. The first iPhone cost a hojillion dollars to make, but Apple sells them for $1,000 and make a ton of money at that price point because they've made millions of them. This is so true for government spending that the shipyard building aircraft carriers did a press release begging congress to buy two at once because it would be cheaper than buying one and then waiting a long time and then buying a second one anyway.
https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Media/News/Article-View/Article/...
Kinda a hard argument to say the government can do something cheaper than private industry.
Governments regularly do things cheaper than private industry. And regularly do things more expensively.
Turns out, governments can be efficient and run things well. You just have to tune the incentive structure correctly.
(Aside, I don't care about cheaply as an axis nearly much as I care about "for the benefit of many". I'd take expensive programs that help everyone, every time.)
What do they do cheaper?
Public transit is a great example. Pretty much every attempt to privatize transit worldwide has resulted in, if not failure and subsequent deprivatization, at least higher prices and worse service for the people using the service.
The interstate highway system, which replaced a complex system of partially privately owned roads, is another.
In most countries, healthcare is another great example. And arguably education as well - public schooling produces generally pretty good results worldwide for not that much money per student, and outside the US, higher education is often public and incredible value for money.
US public transit is a finacial disaster far beyond any other country.
Road maintenance is normally cheaper/faster with private.
Healthcare is a can of worms but you could be right. The real problem with public health is what happens when these gov can't afford it anymore. US is likely in the wrong now but I want to see the results 50yrs from now when social spending cannot keep up with rising costs and decreasing taxes in EU (population collapse).
Would you like to see how private industry would handle city water system, and how much subscriptions would cost? They probably could do it cheaper, but they would charge the hell out of the end consumer as profit. Because thats the idea of private industry - profit.
Not saying private do everything but if they already are and it's cheaper why screw with it?
Charging a consumer or taxing them, what's the difference
Take the bridge analogy. Why screw with the ferry business and build a bridge?