This is why I am opposed to privatized prisons.

[snoopy369]

An example of privatization sucking?

Chicago sold off the parking meters... the skyway...

Now, people in the city pay more for the same thing... and the city doesn't get the revenue.

That's privatization. It's outright theft of public assets.

Chicago (and most cities, really) is a great example of when government is run by a bunch of crooks, you get crooked results. Daley really disappointed me at the end, he used to be a good benign dictator, then he sort of went haywire at the end (parking meters, skyway,etc.) The problem is not the concept of privatizing; it's how it was done. I have no problem with privatizing meters - but three problems with how it was done: the '97 year lease for lump sum now' is idiotic (can you say, inflation hedge?); the fact that the meter company has wide latitude to set rates; and the fact that the length of contract means it isn't really competitive. If you had a 5 year lease, and city control over the pricing of the meters and the tickets, I'd have no problem with it - let our police do something useful instead of writing parking meter tickets and collecting change.

I totally agree there are lots of examples of privatization gone horribly wrong. That doesn't mean the concept is bad - just the execution. (Sound familiar? )

[Sava]

Chicago (and most cities, really) is a great example of when government is run by a bunch of crooks, you get crooked results. Daley really disappointed me at the end, he used to be a good benign dictator, then he sort of went haywire at the end (parking meters, skyway,etc.) The problem is not the concept of privatizing; it's how it was done. I have no problem with privatizing meters - but three problems with how it was done: the '97 year lease for lump sum now' is idiotic (can you say, inflation hedge?); the fact that the meter company has wide latitude to set rates; and the fact that the length of contract means it isn't really competitive. If you had a 5 year lease, and city control over the pricing of the meters and the tickets, I'd have no problem with it - let our police do something useful instead of writing parking meter tickets and collecting change.

I totally agree there are lots of examples of privatization gone horribly wrong. That doesn't mean the concept is bad - just the execution. (Sound familiar? )

Yes. Communism. It failed.

Also... capitalism... FAILS... people are willfully ignorant of this fact

There aren't only two ways to run a government or economy.

[Hauldren Collider]

POST ONE ****ING EXAMPLE YOU STUPID ****

ONE

JUST ONE


OMG SAVA IS SO STUPID AHHAHRAHRHAHRAHRHARH


you are useless

Why don't you?

[Sava]

Where is private industry useful? Consumer products. It's the perfect model for this. It's probably the only area where the ideals are fully realized and provide the best results. Industries respond to consumer demand.

But basic services and infrastructure? It's just absurd to rely on a private system. Sure, let companies compete. The government should sub-contract. It can't and shouldn't do everything.

But we are very, very, very far from the "center" of the spectrum of where the balance of government and private industry can provide the best possible results. We have the worst of both worlds. We have the worse results. We have the corruption. We have the profiteering. We have the cronyism.

And what's the right wing response to this?

DURRRRR PLANNING IS BAD
THATS THE SAME AS HITLER

well **** those people

we shouldn't listen to them... for anything

they prove themselves to be monumentally retarded and shouldn't be involved in any discussion about anything... ever

[Sava]

Why don't you?

I already did. The end. I win.

[giblets]

And why is that bad?

There is mercury in the water because of the coal plant. Make a law saying that's illegal. Punish the coal plant.

I fail to see the problem.

If government isn't efficient, it's OUR ****ING FAULT.

Fixing it is a three step process.

First you fix.

Then you it.

Then you FIX IT

You don't say... aw government sucks... hey some billionaire can make a lot of money paying people **** wages to do a **** job. Let's abdicate our responsibility for solving the problem and let that guy make money. That way, we can pay more for less. But you know what? We didn't have to think about it. We can just sit around feeling all good that our actions are in line with some retarded ideological framework.

Making socialism work is obviously just a three step process:
1. Fix it
2. Fix it
3. Fix it

...are you serious? Sava you're a genius.

[Sava]

Who said socialism? Is that "code" for anything a representative democracy does? "Planning things is bad"?

eh?

it's an SNL bit you ****ing moron

jesus christ

how do you even get out of bed each day?

it's amazing you are able to even type on a keyboard to post things online

[giblets]

I'm glad that was a joke and your actual solution is still forthcoming. edit: And yes, it is amazing that in spite of not finding SNL funny or bothering to watch it I can still use a computer.

[Sava]

I don't watch SNL and I still know the reference.

Thus, you are ****.

[Sava]

your actual solution is still forthcoming

I offer no solutions. I'm only here to point out what is stupid. Solutions take work. I hate putting forth any effort towards anything that isn't self-gratification (in some form or another).

[Jon Miller]

Ken, you're either being dense or just not thinking about it. This isn't really something that most liberals disagree with - they oppose privatizing on moral grounds, generally. Government agencies are extremely inefficient. If you're handed $100MM to run a prison, and you have to give back whatever you don't spend, you spend $100MM to run your prison, and then you ask for $110MM next year. If you are handed $100MM to run a prison and you get to keep whatever you don't spend, you spend $85MM to run your prison and take home the change, and then when the contract comes up for bid again a competing company offers to do it for $90MM. This isn't fantasy, it's not even particularly complicated. It's just common sense, and it's exactly what happens in the real world.

I disagree, and as far as I know most people in europe/many liberals in the US would.

We don't see evidence of it generally happening in the real world. It depends on what type of good it is in general.

JM

[Jon Miller]

To go back to page 2:

If a corporation murders and steals and so on, they get a small fine and are told to shape up.

If a person murders and steals and so on, they go to jail for a long time and generally have to pay a huge fine. They can even be killed.

Some of the reason why corporations get a small fine and are told to shape up is because they have a lot of wealth (comparatively) and so have more power in the US system.

But the other part of the reason is that there is limited liability. To a 'person' acting as a rational actor the 'best' behavior might be obvious.

JM

[Aeson]

If a corporation murders and steals and so on, they get a small fine and are told to shape up.

If a person murders and steals and so on, they go to jail for a long time and generally have to pay a huge fine. They can even be killed.

Some of the reason why corporations get a small fine and are told to shape up is because they have a lot of wealth (comparatively) and so have more power in the US system.

But the other part of the reason is that there is limited liability. To a 'person' acting as a rational actor the 'best' behavior might be obvious.

If Obama orders an attack in Afghanistan that ends up killing a child, should all Americans be sent to prison for the murder?

Our government is essentially a very large corporation. A giant monopolistic corporation with somewhat even distribution of shares. We can't all run the thing, so we elect certain people to do it for us. We benefit (or not) from it's actions.

So should we all be held directly responsible for anything the government does? Or should only those people who are actually making the decisions be held responsible for the decisions they make?

[kentonio]

If Obama orders an attack in Afghanistan that ends up killing a child, should all Americans be sent to prison for the murder?

Our government is essentially a very large corporation. A giant monopolistic corporation with somewhat even distribution of shares. We can't all run the thing, so we elect certain people to do it for us. We benefit (or not) from it's actions.

So should we all be held directly responsible for anything the government does? Or should only those people who are actually making the decisions be held responsible for the decisions they make?

How is that a good example? In the example I used earlier of the banks foreclosing on property they don't own, the issue isn't that only the people responsible are charged with crimes, it is that no-one get's held criminally responsible. Because the crimes are carried out by a large organization, apparently no criminal proceedings need to take place and a fine and/or settlement is all that is required.

[Hauldren Collider]

To go back to page 2:

If a corporation murders and steals and so on, they get a small fine and are told to shape up.

WTF. A corporation can't commit murder. I'm now convinced that you fundamentally don't understand what corporations are or how they work.

If someone in a corporation orders someone else in the corporation to commit murder, that's a conspiracy to commit murder and the guilty parties are all individuals. I'm really not sure what you're on about here.