What are the pros and cons of state owned businesses?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Actually, that's how the fascists made the revolution.

They also used violence you know . LOTS of it.

[Odin]

I am just worried about a beauracratic mess if everything is controlled by the government.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Actually, that's how the fascists made the revolution.

They also used violence you know . LOTS of it.

You don't need to use violence. The govt will be presured to either give into the demands of the mob to get the country moving again or use violence to get people back in line.

[Az]

Originally posted by Odin
I am just worried about a beauracratic mess if everything is controlled by the government.

Not more than the mess than any modern company has today.

Only since a single entity will control the entire system, optimization would be much easier.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You don't need to use violence. The govt will be presured to either give into the demands of the mob to get the country moving again or use violence to get people back in line.

In either case though that isn't a revolution . 90%+ of the time to have a revolution you need violence.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You don't need to use violence. The govt will be presured to either give into the demands of the mob to get the country moving again or use violence to get people back in line.

In either case though that isn't a revolution . 90%+ of the time to have a revolution you need violence.

If the result is a new govt then that is a revolution.l

[Imran Siddiqui]

If the result is a new govt then that is a revolution.

New TYPE of government. New government indicates new leadership, same political structure.

Anyway, how often will a leader willingly step down in the face of a mob and allow a new type of government to come in and how often will he stay and fight? I'd bet on the later much more than I'd bet on the former.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Only since a single entity will control the entire system, optimization would be much easier.

And this WON'T result in a bureaucratic mess? Are you kidding me? It is much better to have many different entities than one single one. It lesses the bureaucracy.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Only since a single entity will control the entire system, optimization would be much easier.

And this WON'T result in a bureaucratic mess? Are you kidding me? It is much better to have many different entities than one single one. It lesses the bureaucracy.

Actually, it goes both ways. On the one hand, with many small independant entities, you have a better resource allocation within these entities from between the top and bottom, because the distance between them is shorter.
OTOH, the coordination between these many independant entities requires extra work, which becomes an increasingly more complex and wasteful hell ass the society becomes more complex.

The problem is the opposite in huge integrated entities : the communication between top and bottom is a wasteful maze, but it is much easier and cheaper to articulate the interests of the whole structure.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If the result is a new govt then that is a revolution.

New TYPE of government. New government indicates new leadership, same political structure.

Anyway, how often will a leader willingly step down in the face of a mob and allow a new type of government to come in and how often will he stay and fight? I'd bet on the later much more than I'd bet on the former.

It comes down to whether the army will obey the leader or the people. They may obey the leader initially, but as the leader continues to fail at governing the army will eventually obey the people.

[Kidlicious]

Decentralized planning would surely be a bigger cluster **** than capitalism. I've yet to hear someone come up with a plan that would be the slightest bit feasable.

[Az]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Only since a single entity will control the entire system, optimization would be much easier.

And this WON'T result in a bureaucratic mess? Are you kidding me? It is much better to have many different entities than one single one. It lesses the bureaucracy.

It will do so in controlling structure, but it will reduce bureaucracy and paperwork in dealing between factories, shops, etc. Besides, most of the time, things will go on their own: companies will order products, products will be delivered, etc.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Or you could look at the other side of the equation and see what a totally dismal politically run feasco the nationalized British Automobile & Aircraft manufacturing businesses were.

They were the second largest industries in the world for both fields and state ownership turned them into fat, lazy, and incompetent wrecks which were fit for nothing else but bankruptcy.

Yup. British Leyland was a disaster. However Renault wasn't.

There's no hard and fast rules. Some work, while others don't. I can see a clear logic to nationalisation where national infrastructures are involved, but not industry in general. In addition, a sympathetic government and effective management has to be in place.

[Az]

Laz, I never understood your political beliefs. Could you describe them, please?

[Az]

BUMP.