Moneyed politicians writes on who we can trust with health care reform:

Do I trust bureaucrats or CEOs or politicians more? Yes, in that order.
...
It’s easy to blame government bureaucrats, and sometimes they can be maddening. But when you look at all the areas the government stayed uninvolved, that strategy has proved rather dismal.

Are there cases where the bureaucrats failed rather miserably? Of course, and Katrina stands out as a bureaucracy gone awry. FEMA would have operated far more effectively had it been modeled after Medicare. It would have set the guidelines for all providers of local service, and then subcontracted the administration to one private contractor in each state to fulfill. In FEMA’s case those providers would be local Salvation Armies, churches, motel and grocery chains, etc.
...
Do I trust bureaucrats or CEOs or politicians more? Yes, in that order. Bureaucrats may sometimes be aloof, but they are not on the take.

There are so many things wrong with this post, that it's hard to know where to start.  First of all, it's hard to believe that anyone would pinpoint Medicare as a model of how a government agency should be run, especially when it comes to controlling costs as chronicled by The New York Times:

Medicare spends billions of dollars each year on products and services that are available at far lower prices from retail pharmacies and online stores, according to an analysis of federal data by The New York Times. The government agency has paid above-market costs for dozens of items, a comparison of Medicare figures with retail catalogs finds.

But even more than that, putting our trust in bureaucrats to make decisions that will affect all our lives because of some ill conceived notion that they're not on the take is frankly just silly.  First, the idea that bureaucrats aren't, or can't be on the take, is just absurd.  Whenever one person, or a small group of people, have the ability to make decisions that will affect billions of dollars, and millions of lives, not only is corruption likely, but it's guaranteed.  What's worse is that bureaucrats are unelected, so there is less accountability to the people with a bureaucrat than with a politician.  Though you could argue that the heads of an agency are more easily fired when public will goes against them (Michael Brown), but that's usually where it stops.  Middle manager type bureaucrats are rarely ever effected on any real level.

But more important, it comes down to the basic question of why a bureaucrat should have more say over my life than I do?  There is no way that a bureaucrat could make a single decision that will be the right decision for millions of people.  But odds are pretty good that millions of people can make a good decision for themselves... no bureaucrats required.  So while I may not trust a CEO, I do trust in my ability to stop spending money at his company.

The question ought to be, do I trust bureaucrats, CEOs, politicians, or myself more?  And the answer is myself every day of the week and twice on Sunday.  Enough said.