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'm for privatizing everything. You either fund things on a voluntary, mutual basis where both parties consent...or you fund it by forcefully taking from everybody whether they consent or not.
That's the moral side of it, but it makes more practical sense as well. Anytime you have a monopoly like the state controlling a service, prices go up and quality goes down. At the very least, innovation is stifled and slowed.
A lot of private service providers are forced to raise prices due to the regulations and conditions being imposed on them, and costs go way above what they would normally be. Then you'll have people blame it on privatization or the free market..
This is actually a really interesting question, and given that the leading candidates for President from the Republican party is a businessman and not a statesman, very relevant.
I think to begin, we'd have to ask what the difference between government and business is. I'll keep it short. Business is for profit, government is not. The principles of how they work and why they exist are very different with minimal, if any, overlap. I think it's also important to define the role of government. There would be some arguing, so to keep it simple, government has two basic jobs: (1) provide security to it's people and (2) create and uphold laws. This could be summarized as maintaining society (which is distinct from culture).
I think that description of governmetn is fairly unbiased and well reasoned. The most libertarian people would agree that security in the form of military and police is a role of the government, but a guy like Bernie Sanders would probably argue that part of security would include things like universal healthcare. There is plenty of room for debate about the specifics of those things, but the core principles, as far as I can tell, is accurate.
So, why do Americans fear privatization.
Well, it sort of depends. The thing is, the nature of business is to be about generating a profit. Now, it's not unreasonably to assert that the larger a business becomes, the less ethical it is. One of the largest companies in the US, and the world, Wal-Mart, is seen by many to be one of the most, if not the most, unethical company that exists. Their profit generating is about accumulating wealth. Nothing more. Because of this, it's not unreasonable to be skeptical of privatizing things like Social Security, for fear that it's concern will be self interest rather than for it's consumers. Would they have to pay more for less, for example?
And in fairness, business is not always unethical. Generating profit is not bad. The mom and pop shop down the street is also looking to turn a profit, but that's so they can pay the bills. The CEO of Wal-Mart is generating wealth out of his profit, and is unrelated to survival as he is living well outside of the average person's means. Given that people are clearly skeptical of mass accumulation of wealth, which is why Bernie Sanders is resonating with so many people, fear of privatization for this reason is rational.
Let's be realistic here. A locally owned firm for social security is very much likely to truly care for your well being. But it's riskier to put you're money their because many small businesses fail. And while that risk does not exist in a larger company, that company is also not likely to be interested in what's best for you. They will sell you the least for the most.
Great write up, but what you're overlooking are markets. That is KEY to privatization. And this is the reason why privitization is just flat out better. Why does social security even exist in the first place? The goal is for retirement. There are far better investments for retirement than social security. And it is varied. So again, do we even need social security in the first place? I don't think so.
Are businesses for profit? Yes. And that's a good thing because they care about what you spend. If there was an alternative to Wal-Mart and it ate into Wal-Mart market share. Oh you can believe Wal-Mart would get it's act together. Because at the end of the day, they care about you spending money at their stores.
You mention government. The government does not exist for profit. And that's a problem. Because one has to ask, "why does it exist". And I will always state, the government exist soley to serve the best interest of government. How that "best interest" takes form can vary. But I can tell you this, citizens have 0 bargaining power when it comes to government services. The government will get your money, and there is nothing you can do about it. So you really have no choice. And that's important. The government doesn't have to work in your best interest to "stay in business".
This is actually a really interesting question, and given that the leading candidates for President from the Republican party is a businessman and not a statesman, very relevant.
I think to begin, we'd have to ask what the difference between government and business is. I'll keep it short. Business is for profit, government is not. The principles of how they work and why they exist are very different with minimal, if any, overlap. I think it's also important to define the role of government. There would be some arguing, so to keep it simple, government has two basic jobs: (1) provide security to it's people and (2) create and uphold laws. This could be summarized as maintaining society (which is distinct from culture).
I think that description of governmetn is fairly unbiased and well reasoned. The most libertarian people would agree that security in the form of military and police is a role of the government, but a guy like Bernie Sanders would probably argue that part of security would include things like universal healthcare. There is plenty of room for debate about the specifics of those things, but the core principles, as far as I can tell, is accurate.
So, why do Americans fear privatization.
Well, it sort of depends. The thing is, the nature of business is to be about generating a profit. Now, it's not unreasonably to assert that the larger a business becomes, the less ethical it is. One of the largest companies in the US, and the world, Wal-Mart, is seen by many to be one of the most, if not the most, unethical company that exists. Their profit generating is about accumulating wealth. Nothing more. Because of this, it's not unreasonable to be skeptical of privatizing things like Social Security, for fear that it's concern will be self interest rather than for it's consumers. Would they have to pay more for less, for example?
And in fairness, business is not always unethical. Generating profit is not bad. The mom and pop shop down the street is also looking to turn a profit, but that's so they can pay the bills. The CEO of Wal-Mart is generating wealth out of his profit, and is unrelated to survival as he is living well outside of the average person's means. Given that people are clearly skeptical of mass accumulation of wealth, which is why Bernie Sanders is resonating with so many people, fear of privatization for this reason is rational.
Let's be realistic here. A locally owned firm for social security is very much likely to truly care for your well being. But it's riskier to put you're money their because many small businesses fail. And while that risk does not exist in a larger company, that company is also not likely to be interested in what's best for you. They will sell you the least for the most.
I thought the OP had a good response, but I wanted to expand on one point...
You're right that businesses probably don't care about you to any significant degree because they don't know you. They want, and have an obligation to their shareholders, to maximize the profitability of the company. If they don't, they're fired.
The interesting thing is that people don't apply the same thinking to politicians, bureaucrats, and other government agents. They're just as interested in their own gain as anyone else, maybe more in a lot of cases, and they don't care about you because they don't know you. It's their job and in their self-interest to act like they care, but they want votes and reputation points no matter what the result actually is. It's like we're conditioned to think of them as brave public servants fighting to defend the people...you see it on TV and in movies all the time, but its just ridiculous when you look at reality.
I don't know if I should be replying, because I'm sure no expert, but it seems to me that privatizing tends to corrupt a service by introducing a profit motive and incentivizing cherry-picking.
No sane person should imagine that "all" our social programs are a disaster.
I try to stay out of political discussions for the most part. But ocasionally I find myself getting caught up in some political debates. And my first go to solution is to privatize. This immediately ends the conversation, or I get called all sorts of idiots.
I find it odd that Americas will agree social security is a disaster, the police force is a disaster, all of our social programs are a disaster. Yet when someone talks about the power of the market, people are automatically scared.
So I ask, why is America so afraid to attempt privatization? Why do we keep looking towards government for solutions? And why do we keep trying the same "solutions" over and over again that has netted very few gains or progress?
They rely on government too much which is odd since government is inefficient. They get so jealous that a company might make a lot of money that they loose sight on the fact that it's about what they receive for their money as well as having more options. Imagine a country with government run restaurants.
I try to stay out of political discussions for the most part. But ocasionally I find myself getting caught up in some political debates. And my first go to solution is to privatize. This immediately ends the conversation, or I get called all sorts of idiots.
I find it odd that Americas will agree social security is a disaster, the police force is a disaster, all of our social programs are a disaster. Yet when someone talks about the power of the market, people are automatically scared.
So I ask, why is America so afraid to attempt privatization? Why do we keep looking towards government for solutions? And why do we keep trying the same "solutions" over and over again that has netted very few gains or progress?
B/c it's rarely cheaper, rarely benefits workers, marginally benefits citizens, and becomes a form of patronage.
They rely on government too much which is odd since government is inefficient. They get so jealous that a company might make a lot of money that they loose sight on the fact that it's about what they receive for their money as well as having more options. Imagine a country with government run restaurants.
Gov't is not inefficient. They just put equality to access over profit.
They rely on government too much which is odd since government is inefficient. They get so jealous that a company might make a lot of money that they loose sight on the fact that it's about what they receive for their money as well as having more options. Imagine a country with government run restaurants.
I like using food production and distribution as an example. We have so much food being produced, and so many grocery stores and restaurants selling to people without any central authority forcing anyone to do it! There's no guarantee, so that must mean everyone will starve to death! That's the mentality people have when talking about privatizing and allowing the market to provide a service.
Then you look at countries where a central authority controlled the food supply and look how that turned out...bread lines and starvation.
There's no one-size-fits-all solution, it depends on the task you're dealing with.
Quote:
I find it odd that Americas will agree social security is a disaster, the police force is a disaster, all of our social programs are a disaster. Yet when someone talks about the power of the market, people are automatically scared.
I for one am not sure I want to embrace the solution for improving law enforcement via "the power of the market". Private prisons do not exactly have a sterling reputation as it is...
I try to stay out of political discussions for the most part. But ocasionally I find myself getting caught up in some political debates. And my first go to solution is to privatize. This immediately ends the conversation, or I get called all sorts of idiots.
I find it odd that Americas will agree social security is a disaster, the police force is a disaster, all of our social programs are a disaster. Yet when someone talks about the power of the market, people are automatically scared.
So I ask, why is America so afraid to attempt privatization? Why do we keep looking towards government for solutions? And why do we keep trying the same "solutions" over and over again that has netted very few gains or progress?
People on the left often point to the example of Chile which privatized its equivalent social security program, with workers putting money into retirement accounts managed by Wall Street type firms.
Turns out that - due to the management fees - the poor ended up getting a much lower rate of return on their retirement savings than the rich got. so a lot of Americans don't want to be pushed into a system where they can expect to get inherently lower returns than the rich.
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.
