Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem, of course, is there are government employees who, when faced with privatization, do not ask the question "What is the most efficient way to provide goods and services to the public" but rather "What is the best way for me to keep my own job?" If privatization entails layoffs of public sector employees, we can expect those public sector employees to act in their own best interests rather than in the interests of the public.
The reality is that not all services are more efficiently managed by the private sector. I already offered this example, but I will do so again. I live in Sacramento. There are two providers of electricity in this area, SMUD a publicly owned utility and PG&E a private, for profit firm. There are many cases of next door neighbors each having their electricity delivered by a different provider. The electricity is the same, the lights work in both houses. The difference? The home that receives electricity from PG&E pays 35-40% MORE than their neighbor who is serviced by SMUD. I'm sorry but I can't think of any argument you could make that would convince me that the private sector company - PG&E is acting in the best interests of the public.
Um.. privatization doesnt abolish the need to pay for things
Our electric company is privatized, you better bet I get an electric bill monthly..
Food, yes.. still gotta pay for it..
Your posting is laughable at its face.. especially given the demand to transfer things to the government so they can not be paid for..
Not at all. Perhaps you have too limited a perspective to see it.
I've lived where services were privatized, and I've lived where they've been a non-profit public utility. The same product was more expensive in the privatized setting -- and by the way, more prone to interruptions of service -- than in the non-profit public utility. The same product, but significantly different costs.
Same for trash collection. Same for recycling.
Everyone understands that the cost of things done by government costs money, either through taxes or fees. So don't try to push off your juvenile insults that we're too dense to understand that.
I just noticed how frequently you use "statist" or "statism" sort of reminds me of myself when I was in school. I remember how cool I thought the word "hegemony" was, I just loved it and used it every chance I got =)
Realize that anarchism is just as dependent on a social contract (the shunning system, which requires massive society-wide cooperation) as every other system of government. Other than island socialism,it might be the most dependent system on adherence to a social contract.
Both anarchism and island socialism suffer from issues of scale because of the level of cooperation and adherence to the social contract that is required.
Incorrect. Mind-blowingly incorrect.
The social contract states at birth a human being is subject to laws of an involuntary state without consent. If the human being violates the terms of the state they can be fined, imprisoned, or killed as the state sees fit.
The shunning system is different. The main differences:
1. No involuntary state/3rd party. If a man chooses to catch X fish on a certain day no involuntary state will fine, cage, or kill him as is the case now.
2. Shunning is not iniating force nor does it preclude one from doing business with a "bad" person.
Last edited by No_Recess; 01-25-2016 at 12:32 PM..
That is an inaccurate view of business behaviour. Our mostly-free market economy is incredibly brutal. Businesses who do not focus on the needs of their customers are not long for this world. Businesses are in the business of creating for their customers. Only customers get a vote on what constitutes value. If your widget solves a problem, customers may purchase it. If you can't solve a customer's problem, you do not add value. Profit is how we measure the value added -- but the key is the value added itself, not the profit.
Businesses are the vehicle by which value is created in society.
Incorrect.
Businesses face regulation therefore profit is paramount. This is why technology-based industries that hold patents often intentionally make lesser products short term to save on launching costs.
You can't do business with a customer until you first do business with the government. That is not good for the customer at all.
The social contract states at birth a human being is subject to laws of an involuntary state without consent. If the human being violates the terms of the state they can be fined, imprisoned, or killed as the state sees fit.
The shunning system is different. The main differences:
1. No involuntary state/3rd party. If a man chooses to catch X fish on a certain day no involuntary state will fine, cage, or kill him as is the case now.
2. Shunning is not initiating force nor does it preclude one from doing business with a "bad" person.
You are about four centuries behind in your concept of the social contract.
Check out some Proudhon (which will at least get you up to the 19th century). You are talking about a social contract. But really what I am getting at is more 20th century theory like original position and neo-Hobbesian theory.
You are about four centuries behind in your concept of the social contract.
Check out some Proudhon (which will at least get you up to the 19th century). You are talking about a social contract. But really what I am getting at is more 20th century theory like original position and neo-Hobbesian theory.
Thanks & respect for your insights here, much appreciated!
I think your description of the benevolent society paradox is particularly relevant. I've been called a Pragmatic Anarchist (along with a bunch of other things I'd rather not repeat here ). & I guess if the shoe fits, I'll wear it. Pragmatic Anarchist along the lines of 'Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient." I'm very much interested in problem solving using a critical/creative thought process. I appreciate pragmatic, plausible, & possible solutions or considerations. These are helpful.
I agree Anarchy (& oftentimes Libertarianism) requires universal benevolence to implement successfully or even at all. Problematic for this & other reasons. Not often helpful in solving real world problems in real time & for the long term.
I also agree when you say, "anarchocapitalism masquerades as libertarianism." Thanks & respect for unmasking.
& this is an important question or challenge to consider:
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6
So, how do you ensure that the entire world stays benevolent and never breaks the stateless societal pact for their own advantage?
Thanks also for updating Social Contract theory! This again, is useful, helpful & much appreciated!
That is an inaccurate view of business behaviour. Our mostly-free market economy is incredibly brutal. Businesses who do not focus on the needs of their customers are not long for this world. Businesses are in the business of creating for their customers. Only customers get a vote on what constitutes value. If your widget solves a problem, customers may purchase it. If you can't solve a customer's problem, you do not add value. Profit is how we measure the value added -- but the key is the value added itself, not the profit.
Businesses are the vehicle by which value is created in society.
I agree with much of what you've said here. Just curious, (picking your brain a bit if you don't mind), what role do externalities play in your figuring?
Anarchy doesn't require universal benevolence. People can't be trusted with power over others, and that's the key pragmatic reason to not have a state. It's because people aren't always good that we can't give them control over everyone else's lives.
Honestly, I don't care what people do in a free society. You can do whatever you think will work best. Form a democratic republic with other like-minded people if you want, start a commune, start a libertarian minarchist community...just don't force anyone else to be part of your system.
It's very telling that this issue is so personal to you and ChiGeekGuest.
If I'm so fringe and a loser and play video games all day in my mom's basement why has my personal outlook been so heavily scrutinized and ostracized?
I've found this to be the case when debating nearly every sta...ah...social contract believer...I've come across.
No real point here. Just an interesting sidebar.
Please accept my apology No_Recess. It was not my intention to upset you. I know I lose my cool sometimes & I'm sorry if I've done so here with you. I'll try to remember you're sensitive rather than thinking of you as a drama queen. Although you gotta admit it's a challenge (for me) when you say things like you're afraid you're going to be fined, caged, or killed. Or raped, murdered or ... .
&, as usual, I'm curious. When you say "heavily scrutinized & ostracized" - is this similar to the 'shunning system' you've mentioned in recent posts? Please explain the shunning system more thoroughly. Thanks & respect.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). & I guess if the shoe fits, I'll wear it. 
Pragmatic Anarchist along the lines of 'Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient." I'm very much interested in problem solving using a critical/creative thought process. I appreciate pragmatic, plausible, & possible solutions or considerations. These are helpful. 
