Not likely. Politicians don't go around firing government workers. Politicians don't go down to the production floor to spur-on increases in productivity.
What politicians do is charge taxes and fees BEFORE they have rendered any service for services the taxpayer may not even be consuming but must pay under threat of legal action and then the politician uses that money to pay cronies in return for contributions (assuming outright bribery hasn't already occurred).
Was this project even necessary? Would the public transit system become sufficiently more cost-effective or render better service as opposed to the previous methods of collecting fares to justify the expenditures? Or is this just one more solution looking for a problem because someone needed to appear to be doing something to justify their phoney-baloney jobs.
At least the company in the article is on the hook for the lost revenues. If a government shop had screwed this up they'd just keep pouring good money after bad.
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read
