Reason partially won me over with this argument, particularly on the parking meter issue with regards to traffic congestion, though I wonder if Chicago made it's money back on the deal.
I get the feeling however that there are a lot of "but somethings" after the cuts in a lot of the interviews that Reason doesn't want to air. Still more propaganda than an honest discussion.
@studio7manga They should just introduce a congestion charge like they have in London, UK and make public transport more reliable. Win/Win- Better yet, get some people in to run these services that do actually care about raising revenue, then they would not have to privatize and it would mean more money for the city.
I agree that is seems like propaganda. Is there any such thing as an objective news report?
@studio7manga I'd say the opposite, Reason's discussion is honest, it's the normal and general discussion that bring in the flat earth society and creationist to discuss a topic and treat them seriously.
The argument against it btw is that they made a profit. So not only did the costs go down but they actually made money on it, and some people view that as wrong because they are insane.
3:28 They've privatized the turnpike and parking meters to foreign countries ... I forget who, like China and Saudi Arabia? ... Is that such a great idea, to make Americans slaves to foreign interests? We've been sold out.
Elected officials have an incentive to keep quality services, if they keep the streets clean, taxes low, snow plowed, and trash picked up residents will usually be more inclined to re elect.
If you keep services in city control, you as a voter and resident have a little more say in what you want. If the city contracts out with a company, and that is the only provider you have, you are stuck with whatever the company decides.
raise the price as high as they want. When cites contract out services like trash, electric, water, sewer etc, they usually only contract with one company. The first year or two the company will come in with a low bid. Then they will jack the price up, cut services, etc....it happens all the time. The city can then find a new contractor but there are not unlimited amounts of people that are looking to buy a city sewer system, water system, electric system.
@Conscientiousmind I do refuse transaction with companies that raise there prices too much, treat employees or customers unfairly, or for any other reasons that justify in my own mind not doing business with them. You as a shopper can choose any store in the country or internationally with the internet now where to shop. Look for deals, research the company, etc. But what if I told you, you were only allowed to shop at one store all the others are off limits. That one store knows this and can
I can't understand why liberals are so suspicious of free markets where others hold no coercive power over them. Yes, capitalists will try to rip off customers and treat workers like shit when possible, but it's OUR job to make sure that doesn't happen! We have tools: direct action, strikes, boycotts and competition to name a few.
It's convenient and quick to ask for the government to help us, but there comes a time when you can't walk anymore if you've sat in a wheelchair for too long.
Bottom line, it is up to citizens to elect people who are going to work for them and demand quality. Go to council meetings, vote in elections, allow city leaders to hear your voice. When they realize there job is on the line things will change. All privatization does is allow city leaders friends and associates to cash in big. It happens all the time, the mayor gets a kick back from every job he contracts out.
@mandi0126 1. This is called the "good king fallacy" - the idea that if you just elect the right folks in, they'll make things alright. The problem is that elections are few and far between and public servants have way too much on their plates to manage things effectively.
2. You're mistaken: private actors ARE accountable to you! All you need to do is refuse transaction with them and they'll lower their prices and improve quality. They can only rip you off if you, the consumer, allow them to.
@ConscientiousMind Really? Accountable? Is BP accountable to me somehow? Why don't I take BP and anyone else that screws me over to court, oh wait. I can't afford the lawsuits they'll be throwing at me. Free markets look good on paper and that's about it. When things are not in private hands, you get a lot more say than if you hold off paying a company, because private companies will just find new revenues or fire off workers.
@circedge That only works in a system where business is protected by the government. In a true free market BP would have been hurt way worse because they would have picked up the entire tab. Free markets don't only look good "on paper." Ask the good people of Hong Kong how good their free market looks compared to neighboring China
If it is city owned, the city can determine prices, service quality etc. For instance if there was a snow storm and the city contracted with a company to plow the snow, the city managers couldnt decide when or how the streets would get plowed, if there was an ambulance or fire truck that needed down a side street they couldnt dispatch a plow truck to that street, if there were a wind storm the city couldn't collect branches and brush city wide for free. A contractor would charge an arm and a leg
If you privatize city services be prepared for poorer quality more expensive services. If it is city owned the city does the jobs/work at cost. They are not in the business to make money, just maintain. Private companies are all about profits and will raise the rates as high as they can. Look at gas for your car, home, etc. The real problem is your city leaders. You have to elect people who will put city services first. If the city sells the service, they loose control.
I wish they would allow private transportation systems to run in Cleveland. Thank you, Tom L Johnson, a socialist from the previous century's aughts, for taking over the busing and rail systems. GCRTA is impeccable, and there are no budget problems to be had. I love taking RTA!!
Chicago is most definitely not some beacon for privatization. Our roads are crumbling, our bridges are crumbling, parking meters are ridiculously high at every street (privatization allows no accountability), schools are closing, class sizes have tripled in the past few years, law enforcement has become the most corrupt in the entire country, animal shelters have higher euthanasia rates because profit incentives. Really in essence privatization has devastated our city.
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
@llamaczar The videos turned me on to Reason magazine how ironic is that? I understand why it is good to have libertarian views. I am glad to see Drew Carey is so loyal to his home city. The coolest thing about Cleveland is the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
RE-EMPOWER the unions? Are you serious? They have TOO MUCH power, that's the problem! Oh, the poor unions, all they can do is spend millions lobbying the government to keep their high-wage, cadillac-health-plan, huge-pension jobs and run our education system into the ground. I am not shedding tears for unions. Especially public-sector ones.
listen to the sub text "this is the money the government is generating out of the asset, look at how much more can be captured if you take into a private regime". It the usual american story: public risk (and development) and private gain.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Goldsmith wrecked Indy Parks with this privatization crap. What do we expect will happen to our inner-city youth who are poor and and cant even have a nice freakin park to play at!?!?
Tax the rich 70%, raise tariff's on all products imported by China, Kill Wal-Mart and rebuild this damn country already!
@docwatsonphd The top 1% own 90% of this countrys wealth. Now are they more productive because of the amazing things they've done? Or is it because the difference between CEO's and the worker is 650%?
We will never recover the money that was stolen from us by the super rich until we start taxing them where they should be.
@joepglass I don't like that people lose jobs in the process, but outsourcing (as well switching jobs over to machinery) is what keeps the quality of the life for the average American at such a high level. You can't handicap the economy (or slow progress) for the sake of jobs; if we did that then we'd still have horse-drawn carriages. Obviously you have to look at individual examples (I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart), but by and large this is a good thing. Employment is not the sole goal.
joepglass do the world a favor an don't reproduce.
The inner city is already crumbling as it is so the continuation of doing the same thing isn't going to result in a different effect, also raising tax levels won't change a thing. When irresponsible government spending caused the problem in the first place!!!
As far as China and Wal-Mart are concerned, right now. We are living off China buying our debt, so trying to collapse them is beyond stupid.
@bigboss686 Dork. Nothing you said makes a damn bit of since. Lets continue to watch the inner cities fail and see what happens to our rich then. They get raped and killed cause even though you may try, you cant put everyone in prison. The rich have to give back for the greater good, dork.
@Chainedorlo Sure it would, hey remember when the rich had a 90% tax rate and we built this country with that money. Now the rich get taxed as low 30% and our country is crumbling. Lets continue to let the rich rule this country and watch as the market sells this country right out from under us.
Tax the rich? Why do you think people work? They want to be rich, if the rich are heavily taxed I'll either move somewhere my efforts are rewarded or join the masses in living off the nanny state. People who produce the world's wealth don't do it for the benefit of others, they want to reap the rewards and enjoy the best that life has to offer. Anything less than that destines the best and brightest to mediocrity.
@yytrert The rich make up 1% of the population. 95% of the country is not rich. Now if you leave and take your money to England, be prepared to pay even higher taxes that what I proposed. And they have a windfall profits tax to boot which is something we need badly.
@joepglass oh you are so right, 1% are rich, 95% are not rich and 4% of the population doesn't exist.
Who said I'd go to england? There's an entire world out there, and more than a few places where people who contribute are rewarded and not penalized for being successful
@yytrert You need to understand the difference between rich and super rich. If you have five million dollars, you are rich. If you have five hundred million dollars, you are super rich. The 4% represents the "rich".
And no, you cannot simply take your millions of dollars to another country and not be targeted. This is a silly scare tactic that the rich use and if you think that another country will allow an american millionaire live for free, you simply do not understand the world.
I don't know brother. Seems to me that rich people can move. Lots of them do. There are many places in the world that cater to them. People don't move their money "offshore" or to the Caymans for no reason.
Businesses certainly have left this country and who can blame them anymore?
@joepglass Tax the rich 70%, and we will lose them and have less tax income then we started with. Kill cheap imports and those "poor" kids may have a crappy city-run playground but they won't be able to afford shoes or clothes or millions of other items that are affordable because we import them from China. Let's fix the damn unions that drive up costs already!
The government should hand the market over to the vendors. They're the only ones with any legitimate claim to own it at this point. If they want to sell it, no problem, but at least they'd be in control of what's ultimately done with it.
But the purpose of the West Side market is not the same as a supermarket. A great deal of its value lies in its link to the past and its clout as a tourist attraction.
Perhaps the best way to manage the market would be to run it through a not-for-profit organization, as the quite profitable North Market in Columbus is managed. That way, you take the market off of the city's books, but you protect private interests from just bulldozing it and building a Walgreens.
Why couldn't that Cleveland manager answer how much money that farmer's market makes? Primarily because - he doesn't care. Why should he? It doesn't matter how much money the place makes so long as he keeps his job.
PPPs are disgusting. It's just upgrading from socialism to fascism; Effectively throwing the government one more bone to keep it alive one more decade.
If I was in charge of a city, I'd sell public golf courses & famer's market facilities immediately. I'd remove zoning laws to reduce housing costs. I'd end minimum wage to create jobs. I'd remove barriers to entry to increase competition & decrease prices. I'd post a schedule for when I will be closing entire departments, so government employees can look for real jobs, private companies can prepare to replace government departments, & can hire the best x-government employees of their choice.
I discuss this series at the following link (remove the spaces around the dot), and see the update for what Reason "forgot" to tell you about who bought the Chicago Skyway:
24ahead . com/n/9853
One of the major reasons why you can't trust Reason is because they keep "forgetting" to tell you things like that.
Ok, so that's the trade off. On the one hand you can keep the money in the nation, but it doesn't lead to very much quick innovation. Privatize, and you open yourself up to the possibility of inviting corporations from out the country. But even if that happens, isn't is worth it if it saves our quickly crumbling infrastructure? We can't just keep patching up the old stuff. I say we need to try different things in different cities and see what works. Public or private, just use what works best.
And of course, that's what fuels economists' old myth known as "natural monopoly." We now know there's really no such thing as 'natural' monopoly. If a monopoly arises privately in a market with few barriers to entry, if that's really even possible, it's b/c the company was efficient and gave people what they wanted. But most monopolies were granted that status or at least helped crush competitors by government. Which makes you question whether antitrust laws are all that necessary.
@whoo689 Monopolies are ONLY limited by government is when you want healthy competition. As you know, natural monopolies are government granted in a city when competing business slows down or impedes proper functioning of a new technology. Like, building pipelines for public water (natural monopoly). If too many companies interfered, it would slow down efficient pipelines. So, there are rare exceptions to every rule.
A lengthy privatization wouldn't even be needed if people quit thinking government has to do so damn much and that without government, nothing will get done. Trash collection, golf courses, farmers' markets, you name it, so many of these things could EASILY be done efficiently in the competitive marketplace by private firms willing to make a profit. But of course, we've had these things as gov't monopolies for so long it's been engrained in our minds to think "private markets won't work."
I sure hope those solar-powered Chicago meters are efficient. I wouldn't wanna visit some stores late at night or go out late at night and not be able to park b/c the thing doesn't work at that time, and the energy ran out.
Do some of Cleveland's residents actually think golf courses and farmers' markets are a god-given right or some shit? what nonsense. And it's not like ALL of us really give 2 shits about either. or go to convention centers for that matter.
Public golf courses have their place, not as if players don't pay to play on them, if they're taking tax money then the greens fees can be increased. They're designed for the middle class. Leave it to super rich guy Drew Carey to blow shit about public golf courses, he can golf at any country club in the country.
LOL! I have seen the stats printed in a Michigan newspaper, sorry for no links. Sorry that I don't have the stats in front of me, but if you want to look up MEAP scores for different school districts, perhaps they are on a Michigan government website. Michigan does have better regs on charter schools than Arizona, what I've read, I would expect even worse results.
Of course there are tenured incompentent teachers, just that the libertarian airhead solution is no solution.
Public private partnership is a joke. You get the worst of both worlds and when it all goes wrong it is capitalism that is blamed. In the UK it has just been a way to pay for politicians public services without raising taxes. The whole process is corrupt.
I'm from Cleveland, currently in Chicago, and I was here in Chicago when they started privatizing all the meters. Long story short, the citizens hated it, fees went up and the Mayor immediately regretted it, publicly.
I'm not against privatizing certain things (go ahead, take the golf course. I could care less), but what's needed is multiple perspectives. A libertarian only mindset would be just as bad as the current democrat only mindset in Cleveland.
Stephen Goldsmith wasn't the hot shit like this vid tries to portray him. Hell, google Stephen Goldsmith privatization to get a better picture of the guy.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The typical set up a strawman garbage is being blown here. It's simply another rape of the working man to make the executives of private contractors richer.
A knee jerk conservative response as privatizing seldom gives better results.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Don't expect these privatize everything fucktards to mention that.
Privatization results in low paid workers, high paid executives and public officials getting payoffs when leaving office, or even while in office ( albeit not on the same level as the crooked judge alluded to).
Everyone else should watch the segment of Capitalism A Love Story to see what this poster is saying.
Michael Moore might be your hero and you might believe he means well, but either Moore is dumb or a shill.
Moore confuses you by mistaking Corporatism for Capitalism.
Corporatism is a kind of Collectivism whereby a few establish thru force of law, an oligopoly, which enables the few to kill off competitors.
Capitalism is living by acquiring intermediary goods and using such to become efficient in producing a surplus of final goods to justify getting the intermediary goods.
LOL! Guess you didn't watch the movie or follow the news to appreciate what the OP was saying, you see Michael Moore and that's it. But I expect nothing more from ignorance.
Corporatism cannot exist without Politicians and Bureaucrats.
As any type of Collectivism, Corporatism arises only thru government.
Capitalism exists irrespective of the existence of politicians and bureaucrats.
Where a man devises tools to help him make more stuff, that man has lived by Capitalism.
Both the horse and the plow of a horse-pulled plow are capital a man leverages to yield more crops, which he can swap for other things from like-minded men.
I think what you're describing (and much of what is described in this video) is not really "privatizing" property, but just privatizing the tax collecting apparatus. Privatizing the actual asset (roads, or what have you) would solve this problem.
" I do not want to see everything "privatized." Such as traffic enforcement when a company like RedFlex is allowed to put up cameras and mail fines for a cut."
That's not privatization - that's a state-granted monopoly. A privatization is when an individual or group owns the road - not the government, and also not a company acting as a collection device for the government.
you're not thinking this through. If a private company, with permission from the local government make a cut of the fines collected from people breaking the law, then who is paying for the equipment and the maintenance of the system? The people breaking the law! If the government does it, as always, they fail to do it cost effectively, and all taxpayers get saddled with the expenses.
Nothing wrong with partnership that is various owners, thats how capital is produced which provides "SOMETHING". You can have private partnerships competing with other private partnerships and the more capital produced means more production for a good and therefore a decrease in price because of competition. Your thought on corpratism is totally different you talking about corporations that fraud and price fix which wouldnt happen in a free market if peopel found out they would boycott.
Well, no. Corporatism is when legislation is passed to favor certain corporation over other businesses and individuals. This is just privatizing previously public assets.
That's not corporatism though and that's favoring them. There's no intrinsic value in selling to corporations. It's business. Privatizing previously public assets is business.
Is given money by tax payers? Thy own the roads and charge people for using them. Why, because they are providing a service to their customers. If you don't pay them for the service that's stealing. That's why you go to jail. Duh.
No, they're not. Public private partnership just means that public assets are sold to a private corporation and some of the money they make is given to the government, as in taxes.
Public-private partnership (PPP) describes a government service or private business venture which is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private sector companies. These schemes are sometimes referred to as PPP, P3 or P3.
Right, and the corporation splits the profits with the government. It's not actually called taxation, but that's what it is. It's not total privatization, but it's a good start.
cant argue with that logic! Hey, do yourself a favor, since you dont care about reality, dont pay any attention to whats happening with the newer prisons being built. itll shit all over you
The only one here denying reality is you. Clearly you have not checked your facts. And private prisons are not the same as privatized roads mainly because prisons, as part of law enforcement, are one of the few functions of the state. Roads are not.
No they're not and they don't have to be Government roads are terrible. They can't even get the potholes out. Then there are the constant traffic jams and if a car accident happens good luck. You could be stuck there for at least an hour.
Privatized roads are fucking nasty too, have you ever driven on the PA turnpike? Dont try that religious "businesses are always better" nonsense, because they fail just as hard as governments do, it just so happens, theres more businesses than governments, so you'r eventually going to get a few that do it right.
But government always does it right? It sounds more like you're basing your arguments on philosophy rather than facts. It really is quite convenient for me that you mentioned the PA turnpike because I have to use it everyday. It's very nice too. There's seldom any traffic jams and there are plenty of signs, nice and big too, that tell you where your exit is. As opposed to New Jersey for example where the signs are few and far between and microscopic along with the needless traffic jams.
You liberals always stick the word religious in when somebody has a different view of things. Why do you do that? I'm an atheist and I don't even accuse as many people as holding religious like beliefs. Anyway, you miss the key difference between government and a corporation. If a corporation does a lousy job then they go out of business and are replaced with a new one. If government does a bad job, oh well. You're stuck with them.
I accused you of having religious market views because your views are dogmatic in nature. Markets are better because markets are better. Business always does good.
Business does not always do good, in fact, most businesses are just as bad as bureaucrats, they simply hide behind "corporate policy" or, the fact that they make enough money anyway. Take Verizon for example, they straight up dont give a shit about customers.
We need more power over government, blame the founders.
Verizon has great products. The new android, completely awesome. Also, I'm not making the assertion markets are better because markets are better. It can be easily observed that markets do better because they're forced to innovate. Governments don't have to worry about that. And I never said business always does good. That's where government comes in. It punishes businesses for any wrong doings with fines and imprisonment.
the android was made mostly by google, much of the apps for it are made by the community and other open source developers.
Verizon has the worst customer support ive ever experienced in my life, and I wasnt talking about unethical business practices, but rather crappy products and support.
What market innovations are you talking about? Computers, internet? Public funding and academia,
Once again you are missing the point. If you don't like Verizon go to AT&T, go to Sprint, T-Mobile, anyone. You have a choice, but with government you don't. And why are you referencing computers and the internet? They caused billions upon billions of mostly wasted tax dollars. Then when the market got a hold of them computers shrank and the internet reached across the entire globe. It's like NASA, billions wasted, but Virgin, only a few million and at no cost to the tax payer.
I am talking mostly about their internet, which they hold a monopoly on in my area because theyre the only provider of DSL. All of those companies are assholes though.
Which is why we need more power over government.
Computers and ARPRA were not wasteful, they were given to the market for a very specific reason and that was so more taxable profit can be had.
NASA is more ambitious, and has to experiment, which means sometimes it fails. Thats a good thing. they to be able to do that
If there really is a monopoly in your area then you should check your local ordinances or you could get satellite and how do you know they're all assholes? Have you tried them? And ARPRA and computers being given to the marketplace doesn't change the fact that corporations did much better with those technologies than the government and at no cost to the taxpayer. As for Virgin, once they get off the ground they will be able to do the same thing as NASA at, once again, no cost to the taxpayer.
@sniper6081 We have cable providers, so theyre not technically a monopoly.
I have ATT for cell, Verizon for net, and I know p eole with sprint, t mobile etc. They all assholes, ive heard/experienced horror stories from everyone one of t hem
The government NEVER MADE CONSUMER PRODUCTS. How can you compare that and be serious(might as well compare food to television)? The market did not create the ineternet, we all admit its important. Theyll only make progresss because of NASA
@xkeltoix You can still get satellite. Anyway, if you don't like the big cell and net providers try some of the smaller guys. Anyway, have you ever heard of the Trabant? It's a consumer product made by the East Block in Germany during the Cold War. It was so bad that you had to put the gas and oil directly into the engine by hand and then you had to shake the car to mix the two together. That's the best government could do. And who will only make progress because of NASA?
@sniper6081 Why would I, let alone ANYONE with absolute basic knowledge of networking want something as backwards as Satellite internet? I would rather deal with cable.
What does that car have to do with anything? Every government is different. Stop cherry picking. Governments have also made good mass transit, look all over europe for that. Reciting Stossell fallacies wont make things easier for you.
commercial "Nasas" piggyback off of NASA's research.
@xkeltoix All governments are the same because the same principles apply to all of them, like the "Law of Unintended Consequences" for example. I really do love that classic line. Our government can do national socialism, communism, central economic planning, or whatever, better than other governments. It's different for us. It's the same no matter where it is. And stop being ridiculous. Most of our technologies today came from the market, not NASA. Seriously, cut the shit.
@sniper6081 this is why I consider you to be dogmatic. Democracies and dictatorships are the same then? i am literally rolling on the floor laughing AT you. Oh so, now our government can do certain things BETTER than otehr governments, YET THEY ARE ALL THE SAME? lol again. Its the same no matter where it is? lol x3
Really? Space craft technology was funded, created and tested not by NASA? lol x4
Obviously you didn't actually read what I wrote. All governments are the same in that they are all subject to the laws of economics. It doesn't matter what style of government it is. Second you clearly demonstrated that you have no clue about commercial space technology. Going back to Virgin again, their basic space technology was made by an inventor who won an X Prize competition. He and his team developed the technology which Virgin bought added a little of their own tech and opened shop.
@sniper6081 I definitely read what you wrote, and r esponded correctly.
The "laws" you speak of, are mostly subjective.
Commercial space technology wouldnt be possible without the research NASA has done. Public funding did it first. I bet you hate that. Of course, when commercial space craft actually takes off, you guys probably wont have any problems trying to rewrite history a you just love to.
any space technology thats been made at this point owes it to nasa, or another gov. funded agency
Oh sure, they're subjective, unless you study market behavior. Fine, ignore it, but that won't change economics. Anyway, let me say it again. The technology the space industry uses is their own. They developed their own technology from scratch or bought it from inventors who did it on their own. Most of today's space technology comes from the X Prize competition. You haven't even looked into this, you just assume. If that's the route you want to go then stop talking to me.
@sniper6081 market behaviors change depending behavior.depending on the regional market, if there even is one.
they USE THE RESEARCH FROM NASA.They were the first to do it they laid the ground work. if I made a prog that adds2+2. Its not totally of my own mind, someone showed me math.understand now, or do I need to spell it out in even simpler terms?Since you just said "most of todays space technology comes from x prize"I want you to PROVE that the majority of NASAs technology comes from them
I know market behaviors change. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the laws of economics. Laws that cannot be changed by anyone.
Secondly, I was referring to the technology in the private market. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. The private market has taken a different path with its technology, one separate from NASA. The only thing they have in common are rockets, but those were invented by the Chinese. Everything else is custom.
@sniper6081 lol you keep backing up and changing its so funny.
Which laws specifically? and have they proven to be absolutely true 100% of the time without ANY question, ever? Doubtful.
Oh, now by "most of todays space technology" you mean "most of the PRIVATE technology" they still use the research and information NASA found out during the space race and so on. Prove they never used ANY information. Good luck. you are very very naive.
They're called laws for a reason, because they've been proven. If you want proof, read, The Theory of Money and Credit by Ludwig Von Mises, Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles by Jesus Huerta Soto, and Choice in Currency by Friedrich Hayek. I doubt you will though.
And prove they haven't used any information? Have you even seen the launching apparatus? It's completely different from NASA.
And how am i backing up and changing and what makes me naive? If anyone's naive it's you.
@sniper6081 Laws such as Economic calc. Error? I am already very familiar with Mises and the bunch. They too, tend to be dogmatic. Mises isnt so bad, however, his "laws" arent really laws, and ec. calc. er. tends to be a criticism of complete state socialism. His law says Cuba should have collapsed by now. I personally think they will eventually, but the point stands.
They still know about the way NASA does things, which leads them to how thery are now.
Mises is one of the most respected economists to ever live as well as Soto and Hayek won the Nobel Prize for Economics. You can't just throw out those credentials just because you don't agree with them. The only reason why Cuba has yet to fall is because of all the foreign aid they get, but like you said, it won't last forever.
Anyway, of course they know the way NASA does things. That doesn't mean they follow them.
I didn't say anything regarding if I am naive or not. You brought it up.
@sniper6081 Yes, actually I can. You just commited a logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority" your authority being the Nobel Prize. Which is a fcking joke on all levels. Did Obama deserve a Nobel Peace Prize? Its all a joke man, get with reality.
What foreign aid specifically?
Yes, they know the way NASA does things, they know the formulas and the methods they use, and they put them to use, or made advancements on those things.
I wasn't appealing to authority. I was trying to show you that they are respected for their work and that is something.
Foreign aid, from the UN.
Lastly, the people at the X Prize looked at NASA and other government space programs and concluded that the public would never be able to use it due to the cost, so they started a competition for who could create affordable space technology that the public can use. Basically, they had to start from scratch because NASA tech was too expensive to use.
@sniper6081 "Soto and Hayek won the Nobel Prize for Economics. You can't just throw out those credentials just because you don't agree with them. "
Yes, you were, and you did again, by pointing out theyre respected "and that is something"
governments arent always right about everything, and i never said they used nasa's technology, but rather that they learn from it. withou nasas initiatives they wouldnt be doing this or would be even farther behind than they already are
@xkeltoix How do you know that? How do you know they would be far behind without NASA? Nobody could ever know that unless you could somehow pull a Back to the Future. And I'm curious, if you don't accept the economic theories proposed by the economists I mentioned what economics do you accept?
They wouldn't use formulas. This has o do with aerodynamics which you can thank the Wright Brothers for. The only place where I can see them using formulas is in their rockets, but like I said rocketry is much older than NASA.
There are only two market systems, a centrally planned economy and a free market and centrally planned economies have failed abysmally time and time again. Not just over seas, but right here too. Just look at Cleveland; lot's of central planning and no prosperity.
@sniper6081 they would use mathematical formulas.... do you know anything about the subject? Everything changes once youre in space, and just because nasa didnt invent rockets does not mean rockets are exactly the same as theyve been.
Theres several market systems, anarcho capitalism, keynsianism, socialism, state socialism etc. You are wrong, again, as usuall.
Norway has a better standard of living than we do, better HDI too. Whats the excuse?
Drew didn't say much.
Chicago privatizing? The city of Obama, Rahm and their ilk?
BenjaminWirtz 6 months ago
Good idea, but whatever you do, don't privatize the public transport. Melbourne made that mistake years ago, and is paying the consequences.
angel55676 9 months ago
Reason partially won me over with this argument, particularly on the parking meter issue with regards to traffic congestion, though I wonder if Chicago made it's money back on the deal.
I get the feeling however that there are a lot of "but somethings" after the cuts in a lot of the interviews that Reason doesn't want to air. Still more propaganda than an honest discussion.
studio7manga 9 months ago 2
@studio7manga They should just introduce a congestion charge like they have in London, UK and make public transport more reliable. Win/Win- Better yet, get some people in to run these services that do actually care about raising revenue, then they would not have to privatize and it would mean more money for the city.
I agree that is seems like propaganda. Is there any such thing as an objective news report?
hsmith41 8 months ago
@studio7manga I'd say the opposite, Reason's discussion is honest, it's the normal and general discussion that bring in the flat earth society and creationist to discuss a topic and treat them seriously.
The argument against it btw is that they made a profit. So not only did the costs go down but they actually made money on it, and some people view that as wrong because they are insane.
Visfen 3 months ago
3:28 They've privatized the turnpike and parking meters to foreign countries ... I forget who, like China and Saudi Arabia? ... Is that such a great idea, to make Americans slaves to foreign interests? We've been sold out.
slack7639 10 months ago
Cities especially like big cities like Cleveland shouldn't be in the business of running Small Business's.
FRSFreeStateNow 1 year ago
Elected officials have an incentive to keep quality services, if they keep the streets clean, taxes low, snow plowed, and trash picked up residents will usually be more inclined to re elect.
mandi0126 1 year ago
If you keep services in city control, you as a voter and resident have a little more say in what you want. If the city contracts out with a company, and that is the only provider you have, you are stuck with whatever the company decides.
mandi0126 1 year ago
raise the price as high as they want. When cites contract out services like trash, electric, water, sewer etc, they usually only contract with one company. The first year or two the company will come in with a low bid. Then they will jack the price up, cut services, etc....it happens all the time. The city can then find a new contractor but there are not unlimited amounts of people that are looking to buy a city sewer system, water system, electric system.
mandi0126 1 year ago
@Conscientiousmind I do refuse transaction with companies that raise there prices too much, treat employees or customers unfairly, or for any other reasons that justify in my own mind not doing business with them. You as a shopper can choose any store in the country or internationally with the internet now where to shop. Look for deals, research the company, etc. But what if I told you, you were only allowed to shop at one store all the others are off limits. That one store knows this and can
mandi0126 1 year ago
I can't understand why liberals are so suspicious of free markets where others hold no coercive power over them. Yes, capitalists will try to rip off customers and treat workers like shit when possible, but it's OUR job to make sure that doesn't happen! We have tools: direct action, strikes, boycotts and competition to name a few.
It's convenient and quick to ask for the government to help us, but there comes a time when you can't walk anymore if you've sat in a wheelchair for too long.
ConscientiousMind 1 year ago
Bottom line, it is up to citizens to elect people who are going to work for them and demand quality. Go to council meetings, vote in elections, allow city leaders to hear your voice. When they realize there job is on the line things will change. All privatization does is allow city leaders friends and associates to cash in big. It happens all the time, the mayor gets a kick back from every job he contracts out.
mandi0126 1 year ago
@mandi0126 1. This is called the "good king fallacy" - the idea that if you just elect the right folks in, they'll make things alright. The problem is that elections are few and far between and public servants have way too much on their plates to manage things effectively.
2. You're mistaken: private actors ARE accountable to you! All you need to do is refuse transaction with them and they'll lower their prices and improve quality. They can only rip you off if you, the consumer, allow them to.
ConscientiousMind 1 year ago
@ConscientiousMind Really? Accountable? Is BP accountable to me somehow? Why don't I take BP and anyone else that screws me over to court, oh wait. I can't afford the lawsuits they'll be throwing at me. Free markets look good on paper and that's about it. When things are not in private hands, you get a lot more say than if you hold off paying a company, because private companies will just find new revenues or fire off workers.
circedge 1 year ago
@circedge That only works in a system where business is protected by the government. In a true free market BP would have been hurt way worse because they would have picked up the entire tab. Free markets don't only look good "on paper." Ask the good people of Hong Kong how good their free market looks compared to neighboring China
poop2poop2 10 months ago in playlist Reason.tv Documentary
If it is city owned, the city can determine prices, service quality etc. For instance if there was a snow storm and the city contracted with a company to plow the snow, the city managers couldnt decide when or how the streets would get plowed, if there was an ambulance or fire truck that needed down a side street they couldnt dispatch a plow truck to that street, if there were a wind storm the city couldn't collect branches and brush city wide for free. A contractor would charge an arm and a leg
mandi0126 1 year ago
If you privatize city services be prepared for poorer quality more expensive services. If it is city owned the city does the jobs/work at cost. They are not in the business to make money, just maintain. Private companies are all about profits and will raise the rates as high as they can. Look at gas for your car, home, etc. The real problem is your city leaders. You have to elect people who will put city services first. If the city sells the service, they loose control.
mandi0126 1 year ago
oh yeah just saying this guess whose some of the unions best friends the mafia why do you think the slimeball's have survived so long
theamericano33333 1 year ago
I wish they would allow private transportation systems to run in Cleveland. Thank you, Tom L Johnson, a socialist from the previous century's aughts, for taking over the busing and rail systems. GCRTA is impeccable, and there are no budget problems to be had. I love taking RTA!!
urrlick 1 year ago
Chicago is most definitely not some beacon for privatization. Our roads are crumbling, our bridges are crumbling, parking meters are ridiculously high at every street (privatization allows no accountability), schools are closing, class sizes have tripled in the past few years, law enforcement has become the most corrupt in the entire country, animal shelters have higher euthanasia rates because profit incentives. Really in essence privatization has devastated our city.
queerveganliberal 1 year ago
@queerveganliberal aLL OF THOSE THINGS ARE BECAUSE OF the government. Not the free market.
BrettDunbar 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
tdudley1984 1 year ago
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
tdudley1984 1 year ago
So privatize more city workers jobs, And put me on the unemployment line so that people who don't even live in the city's limits can park.That sound GREAT for the City Of Cleveland!
tdudley1984 1 year ago
@tdudley1984 You wouldn't loose your job dumbshit. You'd just have different employers. AND MORE OF YOUR TAX MONEY BACK
BrettDunbar 1 year ago
The Chicago parking meters have been extremely controversial. Not a great idea, actually.
ASKconard 1 year ago
why dont they just get a golf czar???
oiuoiu988 1 year ago
Love the magazine, love the videos, keep them coming!
llamaczar 2 years ago
@llamaczar The videos turned me on to Reason magazine how ironic is that? I understand why it is good to have libertarian views. I am glad to see Drew Carey is so loyal to his home city. The coolest thing about Cleveland is the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.
RealTime88 1 year ago
@SonnyTheWhiteDwarf Can those people actually say '..Government is not greedy' with a straight face? Wow.
kittyprydekissme 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
ledzep1234567 2 years ago
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
ledzep1234567 2 years ago
somewhere there is a compromise. the government does a crappy job on the money end of things.
yes we have the best military, great highway system, public schools are free for all, etc. But since money is no object, and many have jobs that they can not lose, there is no incentive to perform better. the other extreme is corporate america paying the ceo millions, and offering the working class crumbs. In the middle will be best for all.
ledzep1234567 2 years ago
RE-EMPOWER the unions? Are you serious? They have TOO MUCH power, that's the problem! Oh, the poor unions, all they can do is spend millions lobbying the government to keep their high-wage, cadillac-health-plan, huge-pension jobs and run our education system into the ground. I am not shedding tears for unions. Especially public-sector ones.
bkbff 2 years ago 2
"Does the market make money for the city.... ah no" lol
Darkwizzrobe 2 years ago
listen to the sub text "this is the money the government is generating out of the asset, look at how much more can be captured if you take into a private regime". It the usual american story: public risk (and development) and private gain.
spacemooseprime 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Goldsmith wrecked Indy Parks with this privatization crap. What do we expect will happen to our inner-city youth who are poor and and cant even have a nice freakin park to play at!?!?
Tax the rich 70%, raise tariff's on all products imported by China, Kill Wal-Mart and rebuild this damn country already!
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass Why should the rich be taxed so much more than everyone else?
docwatsonphd 2 years ago 2
@docwatsonphd The top 1% own 90% of this countrys wealth. Now are they more productive because of the amazing things they've done? Or is it because the difference between CEO's and the worker is 650%?
We will never recover the money that was stolen from us by the super rich until we start taxing them where they should be.
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass But who shops at Wal-Mart? The lower classes. Putting tariffs on China will hurt the lower classes.
ModernSurvivor 2 years ago
@ModernSurvivor We lose jobs because of what China is doing. I think people will take jobs over cheap tube socks.
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass I don't like that people lose jobs in the process, but outsourcing (as well switching jobs over to machinery) is what keeps the quality of the life for the average American at such a high level. You can't handicap the economy (or slow progress) for the sake of jobs; if we did that then we'd still have horse-drawn carriages. Obviously you have to look at individual examples (I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart), but by and large this is a good thing. Employment is not the sole goal.
ModernSurvivor 2 years ago
joepglass do the world a favor an don't reproduce.
The inner city is already crumbling as it is so the continuation of doing the same thing isn't going to result in a different effect, also raising tax levels won't change a thing. When irresponsible government spending caused the problem in the first place!!!
As far as China and Wal-Mart are concerned, right now. We are living off China buying our debt, so trying to collapse them is beyond stupid.
Just like your proposed isolationism
bigboss686 2 years ago
@bigboss686 Dork. Nothing you said makes a damn bit of since. Lets continue to watch the inner cities fail and see what happens to our rich then. They get raped and killed cause even though you may try, you cant put everyone in prison. The rich have to give back for the greater good, dork.
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass well I see you have a baseless name-calling down, how about coming up with a solution that something other than Karl Marx, wet dream?
Also, the term giveback is stupid, give back what? They have not stolen anything, they have earned what they have.
You want them to pay 70% in taxes, you want to impose slavery in a system that history shows proven to fail.
Your intellectual prowess could not fill a thimble
bigboss686 2 years ago
@joepglass
Your proposed policies are the path to utter poverty.
Chainedorlo 2 years ago
@Chainedorlo Sure it would, hey remember when the rich had a 90% tax rate and we built this country with that money. Now the rich get taxed as low 30% and our country is crumbling. Lets continue to let the rich rule this country and watch as the market sells this country right out from under us.
joepglass 2 years ago
Tax the rich? Why do you think people work? They want to be rich, if the rich are heavily taxed I'll either move somewhere my efforts are rewarded or join the masses in living off the nanny state. People who produce the world's wealth don't do it for the benefit of others, they want to reap the rewards and enjoy the best that life has to offer. Anything less than that destines the best and brightest to mediocrity.
yytrert 2 years ago 2
@yytrert The rich make up 1% of the population. 95% of the country is not rich. Now if you leave and take your money to England, be prepared to pay even higher taxes that what I proposed. And they have a windfall profits tax to boot which is something we need badly.
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass oh you are so right, 1% are rich, 95% are not rich and 4% of the population doesn't exist.
Who said I'd go to england? There's an entire world out there, and more than a few places where people who contribute are rewarded and not penalized for being successful
yytrert 2 years ago
@yytrert You need to understand the difference between rich and super rich. If you have five million dollars, you are rich. If you have five hundred million dollars, you are super rich. The 4% represents the "rich".
And no, you cannot simply take your millions of dollars to another country and not be targeted. This is a silly scare tactic that the rich use and if you think that another country will allow an american millionaire live for free, you simply do not understand the world.
joepglass 2 years ago
@joepglass Nothing is free, but this populist attack you seem to be organizing can't take the world over.
yytrert 2 years ago
@joepglass,
I don't know brother. Seems to me that rich people can move. Lots of them do. There are many places in the world that cater to them. People don't move their money "offshore" or to the Caymans for no reason.
Businesses certainly have left this country and who can blame them anymore?
averagejoe040 1 year ago
@joepglass Tax the rich 70%, and we will lose them and have less tax income then we started with. Kill cheap imports and those "poor" kids may have a crappy city-run playground but they won't be able to afford shoes or clothes or millions of other items that are affordable because we import them from China. Let's fix the damn unions that drive up costs already!
bkbff 2 years ago
@bkbff Good ole Republicans. Let them walk, the rest of the world will tax the hell out of them.
We need to re-empower our unions and go after the free market crowd for what they stole from us.
joepglass 2 years ago
@bkbff If you tax the rich the economy dies.
get the fuck out
BrettDunbar 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is the world going to end?? Check out my latest music video "2012" and voice your opinion!!
SmosySmosalot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is the world going to end?? Check out my latest music video "2012" and voice your opinion!!
SmosySmosalot 2 years ago
Reason Saves Cleveland with Nick Gillespie.
highonhayek 2 years ago
The government should hand the market over to the vendors. They're the only ones with any legitimate claim to own it at this point. If they want to sell it, no problem, but at least they'd be in control of what's ultimately done with it.
gf1605 2 years ago 2
so why run a business their???
flagship21 2 years ago
epic cut off at 2:00!! LOL!
Chrisnoscrub047 2 years ago
But the purpose of the West Side market is not the same as a supermarket. A great deal of its value lies in its link to the past and its clout as a tourist attraction.
Perhaps the best way to manage the market would be to run it through a not-for-profit organization, as the quite profitable North Market in Columbus is managed. That way, you take the market off of the city's books, but you protect private interests from just bulldozing it and building a Walgreens.
theglasnost 2 years ago
Why couldn't that Cleveland manager answer how much money that farmer's market makes? Primarily because - he doesn't care. Why should he? It doesn't matter how much money the place makes so long as he keeps his job.
ThePenWolf 2 years ago
This is really boring.
PPPs are disgusting. It's just upgrading from socialism to fascism; Effectively throwing the government one more bone to keep it alive one more decade.
Individualism101 2 years ago 2
1:56 LOL awesome.
wrxbungle 2 years ago
If I was in charge of a city, I'd sell public golf courses & famer's market facilities immediately. I'd remove zoning laws to reduce housing costs. I'd end minimum wage to create jobs. I'd remove barriers to entry to increase competition & decrease prices. I'd post a schedule for when I will be closing entire departments, so government employees can look for real jobs, private companies can prepare to replace government departments, & can hire the best x-government employees of their choice.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
There should be a new reality TV show called "Privatize It!"
yonoid818 2 years ago
No, there should just be more exposure on common sense thinking like this show.
sugarkang 2 years ago
I discuss this series at the following link (remove the spaces around the dot), and see the update for what Reason "forgot" to tell you about who bought the Chicago Skyway:
24ahead . com/n/9853
One of the major reasons why you can't trust Reason is because they keep "forgetting" to tell you things like that.
NoMoreBlatherDotCom 2 years ago
Ok, so that's the trade off. On the one hand you can keep the money in the nation, but it doesn't lead to very much quick innovation. Privatize, and you open yourself up to the possibility of inviting corporations from out the country. But even if that happens, isn't is worth it if it saves our quickly crumbling infrastructure? We can't just keep patching up the old stuff. I say we need to try different things in different cities and see what works. Public or private, just use what works best.
ChrisSketch 2 years ago
And of course, that's what fuels economists' old myth known as "natural monopoly." We now know there's really no such thing as 'natural' monopoly. If a monopoly arises privately in a market with few barriers to entry, if that's really even possible, it's b/c the company was efficient and gave people what they wanted. But most monopolies were granted that status or at least helped crush competitors by government. Which makes you question whether antitrust laws are all that necessary.
whoo689 2 years ago
@whoo689 Monopolies are ONLY limited by government is when you want healthy competition. As you know, natural monopolies are government granted in a city when competing business slows down or impedes proper functioning of a new technology. Like, building pipelines for public water (natural monopoly). If too many companies interfered, it would slow down efficient pipelines. So, there are rare exceptions to every rule.
truvelocity 2 years ago
A lengthy privatization wouldn't even be needed if people quit thinking government has to do so damn much and that without government, nothing will get done. Trash collection, golf courses, farmers' markets, you name it, so many of these things could EASILY be done efficiently in the competitive marketplace by private firms willing to make a profit. But of course, we've had these things as gov't monopolies for so long it's been engrained in our minds to think "private markets won't work."
whoo689 2 years ago
I sure hope those solar-powered Chicago meters are efficient. I wouldn't wanna visit some stores late at night or go out late at night and not be able to park b/c the thing doesn't work at that time, and the energy ran out.
whoo689 2 years ago
Do some of Cleveland's residents actually think golf courses and farmers' markets are a god-given right or some shit? what nonsense. And it's not like ALL of us really give 2 shits about either. or go to convention centers for that matter.
whoo689 2 years ago
Whose idiotic idea was it to say "We need a gov't-run golf course. Golf courses CAN'T POSSIBLY arise without government intervention"?
whoo689 2 years ago
Public golf courses have their place, not as if players don't pay to play on them, if they're taking tax money then the greens fees can be increased. They're designed for the middle class. Leave it to super rich guy Drew Carey to blow shit about public golf courses, he can golf at any country club in the country.
robertmike57 2 years ago
Cleveland gov't runs its farmers' markets?? oh come on! It can't be that hard to run. Why would gov't need to do it? Fucking bureaucrats.
whoo689 2 years ago
LOL! I have seen the stats printed in a Michigan newspaper, sorry for no links. Sorry that I don't have the stats in front of me, but if you want to look up MEAP scores for different school districts, perhaps they are on a Michigan government website. Michigan does have better regs on charter schools than Arizona, what I've read, I would expect even worse results.
Of course there are tenured incompentent teachers, just that the libertarian airhead solution is no solution.
robertmike57 2 years ago
Privatization - there's more to the future than better technology.
sniper6081 2 years ago
the cash for kids was just the tip of the iceberg
so far over 20 people ranging from judges to county commissioners
school officials selling teaching jobs
cops selling drugs selling guns
no bid gov't contracts
the buying of gov't contracts
each day more politicians are being charged.
EFTusa 2 years ago
Why weren't the mayor or any Cleveland city council members asked why the farmer's market and golf course can't be privatized?
ComradeLaissezFaire 2 years ago
Because the purpose of this video is to demonize all government run services, to inflame, not investigate.
robertmike57 2 years ago
Public private partnership is a joke. You get the worst of both worlds and when it all goes wrong it is capitalism that is blamed. In the UK it has just been a way to pay for politicians public services without raising taxes. The whole process is corrupt.
Malthus0 2 years ago
5 stars as usual keep um coming
getnick77 2 years ago
I'm from Cleveland, currently in Chicago, and I was here in Chicago when they started privatizing all the meters. Long story short, the citizens hated it, fees went up and the Mayor immediately regretted it, publicly.
I'm not against privatizing certain things (go ahead, take the golf course. I could care less), but what's needed is multiple perspectives. A libertarian only mindset would be just as bad as the current democrat only mindset in Cleveland.
Success in moderation, yo.
MildlyRelevant 2 years ago
Stephen Goldsmith wasn't the hot shit like this vid tries to portray him. Hell, google Stephen Goldsmith privatization to get a better picture of the guy.
robertmike57 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The typical set up a strawman garbage is being blown here. It's simply another rape of the working man to make the executives of private contractors richer.
A knee jerk conservative response as privatizing seldom gives better results.
robertmike57 2 years ago
love this series Reason, keep em coming.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
stop by Luzerne & Lackawanna Counties in PA if you want to
corruption gone wild
EFTusa 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Don't expect these privatize everything fucktards to mention that.
Privatization results in low paid workers, high paid executives and public officials getting payoffs when leaving office, or even while in office ( albeit not on the same level as the crooked judge alluded to).
Everyone else should watch the segment of Capitalism A Love Story to see what this poster is saying.
robertmike57 2 years ago
Michael Moore might be your hero and you might believe he means well, but either Moore is dumb or a shill.
Moore confuses you by mistaking Corporatism for Capitalism.
Corporatism is a kind of Collectivism whereby a few establish thru force of law, an oligopoly, which enables the few to kill off competitors.
Capitalism is living by acquiring intermediary goods and using such to become efficient in producing a surplus of final goods to justify getting the intermediary goods.
TruthAxe 2 years ago 2
LOL! Guess you didn't watch the movie or follow the news to appreciate what the OP was saying, you see Michael Moore and that's it. But I expect nothing more from ignorance.
robertmike57 2 years ago
You amuse, robertmike57.
From your instant-reply rant, we can see you suffer from Cognitive Dissonance.
Because you did not ask for clarification, we can be sure that you have a low IQ, most likely under 118.
A guy like you has a C+ high school diploma in general education classes that didn't demand too much from you.
You might have dropped out of community college, most likely once having grand dreams of being an engineer.
Oh how you amuse.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
You are such a high falutin' intellectual you!
drexelohio 2 years ago
You amuse, drexelohio.
Your oh-so-weighty opinion upon me has no bearing upon truth.
Besides corporatism and capitalism, is there some other subject you would like me to school you upon?
No doubt many exist. Ask. I'll be glad to help you to come to see truth.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
Corporatism cannot exist without Politicians and Bureaucrats.
As any type of Collectivism, Corporatism arises only thru government.
Capitalism exists irrespective of the existence of politicians and bureaucrats.
Where a man devises tools to help him make more stuff, that man has lived by Capitalism.
Both the horse and the plow of a horse-pulled plow are capital a man leverages to yield more crops, which he can swap for other things from like-minded men.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
Yeah, We'd still have farming done by horse drawn plows if libertarians had their way, glad to see you admit that.
robertmike57 2 years ago
You amuse. Again! robertmike57.
Only by the minds of men wielding the forces of capitalism have men through time progressed from horses and pulled plows to Massey-Ferguson combines.
Politicians and bureaucrats did not invent those tools, that capital.
For tools are merely capital, intermediary goods, wielded by men to produce more in less time.
How's that low IQ thingy working out for you?
Blame your parents for their lousy DNA, with which they stuck you. LMFAO.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
I agree, its hell here.
xkeltoix 2 years ago 2
I am pro FREE MARKETS but I do not want to see everything "privatized."
Such as traffic enforcement when a company like RedFlex is allowed to put up cameras and mail fines for a cut.
airborne373 2 years ago 2
I think what you're describing (and much of what is described in this video) is not really "privatizing" property, but just privatizing the tax collecting apparatus. Privatizing the actual asset (roads, or what have you) would solve this problem.
youneverheard 2 years ago 5
I agree 100%. law enforcement is the government's job.
natdavi 2 years ago
It wasn't a RedFlex idea, so don't blame them. At least they wasted less money on this then publicly run program would.
thinksimon 2 years ago
thinksimon- "It wasn't a RedFlex idea." What do you mean by that? Are you saying RedFlex does not want to operate cameras and collect a fee for it?
airborne373 2 years ago
@airborne373
" I do not want to see everything "privatized." Such as traffic enforcement when a company like RedFlex is allowed to put up cameras and mail fines for a cut."
That's not privatization - that's a state-granted monopoly. A privatization is when an individual or group owns the road - not the government, and also not a company acting as a collection device for the government.
libertyplayground 2 years ago 2
@airborne373 why?
ipwnallnubscuzirock 2 years ago
@airborne373 I think we need to blow everything up for Allah, that what he wants.
thedrizzle09 2 years ago
Don't drive on their roads then. Drive on someone else's.
sniper6081 2 years ago
If or anyone is interested in arguments about privatizing highways you should check out some Walter Block videos. It's good stuff.
JonathanRichter333 2 years ago
you're not thinking this through. If a private company, with permission from the local government make a cut of the fines collected from people breaking the law, then who is paying for the equipment and the maintenance of the system? The people breaking the law! If the government does it, as always, they fail to do it cost effectively, and all taxpayers get saddled with the expenses.
aallppiinnee 2 years ago
public private partnerships = corporatism
xkeltoix 2 years ago 11
@xkeltoix I am OK with them selling off some assests that the city should not own. But I agree with you public private leads to a corporatist state.
airborne373 2 years ago
its not that it leads to, but rather that it is.
its exactly what mussolini said it was
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Nothing wrong with partnership that is various owners, thats how capital is produced which provides "SOMETHING". You can have private partnerships competing with other private partnerships and the more capital produced means more production for a good and therefore a decrease in price because of competition. Your thought on corpratism is totally different you talking about corporations that fraud and price fix which wouldnt happen in a free market if peopel found out they would boycott.
Bigturns33 2 years ago
Well, no. Corporatism is when legislation is passed to favor certain corporation over other businesses and individuals. This is just privatizing previously public assets.
sniper6081 2 years ago
that IS favoring corporations....
xkeltoix 2 years ago
That's not corporatism though and that's favoring them. There's no intrinsic value in selling to corporations. It's business. Privatizing previously public assets is business.
sniper6081 2 years ago
the corporation with the contract is given money by tax payers under the treat of jail time to those who wouldnt pay.
its corporatism. its favoritism.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Is given money by tax payers? Thy own the roads and charge people for using them. Why, because they are providing a service to their customers. If you don't pay them for the service that's stealing. That's why you go to jail. Duh.
sniper6081 2 years ago
Public private partnerships are given tax dollars.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
No, they're not. Public private partnership just means that public assets are sold to a private corporation and some of the money they make is given to the government, as in taxes.
sniper6081 2 years ago
Public-private partnership (PPP) describes a government service or private business venture which is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private sector companies. These schemes are sometimes referred to as PPP, P3 or P3.
wikipedia.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Right, and the corporation splits the profits with the government. It's not actually called taxation, but that's what it is. It's not total privatization, but it's a good start.
sniper6081 2 years ago
no, we are directly taxed to help these intitiatives.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
No, we're not.
sniper6081 2 years ago
cant argue with that logic! Hey, do yourself a favor, since you dont care about reality, dont pay any attention to whats happening with the newer prisons being built. itll shit all over you
xkeltoix 2 years ago
The only one here denying reality is you. Clearly you have not checked your facts. And private prisons are not the same as privatized roads mainly because prisons, as part of law enforcement, are one of the few functions of the state. Roads are not.
sniper6081 2 years ago
1) I didnt know we were talking about roads, but even so, the government still gives them money usualyl for the initial construction.
roads ARE one of the functions of the state, along with many many other things
xkeltoix 2 years ago
No they're not and they don't have to be Government roads are terrible. They can't even get the potholes out. Then there are the constant traffic jams and if a car accident happens good luck. You could be stuck there for at least an hour.
sniper6081 2 years ago
They almost always are funded that way.
Privatized roads are fucking nasty too, have you ever driven on the PA turnpike? Dont try that religious "businesses are always better" nonsense, because they fail just as hard as governments do, it just so happens, theres more businesses than governments, so you'r eventually going to get a few that do it right.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
But government always does it right? It sounds more like you're basing your arguments on philosophy rather than facts. It really is quite convenient for me that you mentioned the PA turnpike because I have to use it everyday. It's very nice too. There's seldom any traffic jams and there are plenty of signs, nice and big too, that tell you where your exit is. As opposed to New Jersey for example where the signs are few and far between and microscopic along with the needless traffic jams.
sniper6081 2 years ago
I blatantly said government does not always get it right. I didnt even say anything apologetic towards government.
This is why I think people like you have RELIGIOUS views about markets, rather than ones that come from rational thought.
Philosophy deals with facts... Do you know anything about philosophy at all??
We must drive on different turn pikes, because its pretty god damn nasty, and its just as bad as the other roads are around here. Its a PA problem
xkeltoix 2 years ago
You liberals always stick the word religious in when somebody has a different view of things. Why do you do that? I'm an atheist and I don't even accuse as many people as holding religious like beliefs. Anyway, you miss the key difference between government and a corporation. If a corporation does a lousy job then they go out of business and are replaced with a new one. If government does a bad job, oh well. You're stuck with them.
sniper6081 2 years ago
I accused you of having religious market views because your views are dogmatic in nature. Markets are better because markets are better. Business always does good.
Business does not always do good, in fact, most businesses are just as bad as bureaucrats, they simply hide behind "corporate policy" or, the fact that they make enough money anyway. Take Verizon for example, they straight up dont give a shit about customers.
We need more power over government, blame the founders.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Verizon has great products. The new android, completely awesome. Also, I'm not making the assertion markets are better because markets are better. It can be easily observed that markets do better because they're forced to innovate. Governments don't have to worry about that. And I never said business always does good. That's where government comes in. It punishes businesses for any wrong doings with fines and imprisonment.
sniper6081 2 years ago
the android was made mostly by google, much of the apps for it are made by the community and other open source developers.
Verizon has the worst customer support ive ever experienced in my life, and I wasnt talking about unethical business practices, but rather crappy products and support.
What market innovations are you talking about? Computers, internet? Public funding and academia,
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Once again you are missing the point. If you don't like Verizon go to AT&T, go to Sprint, T-Mobile, anyone. You have a choice, but with government you don't. And why are you referencing computers and the internet? They caused billions upon billions of mostly wasted tax dollars. Then when the market got a hold of them computers shrank and the internet reached across the entire globe. It's like NASA, billions wasted, but Virgin, only a few million and at no cost to the tax payer.
sniper6081 2 years ago
I am talking mostly about their internet, which they hold a monopoly on in my area because theyre the only provider of DSL. All of those companies are assholes though.
Which is why we need more power over government.
Computers and ARPRA were not wasteful, they were given to the market for a very specific reason and that was so more taxable profit can be had.
NASA is more ambitious, and has to experiment, which means sometimes it fails. Thats a good thing. they to be able to do that
xkeltoix 2 years ago
If there really is a monopoly in your area then you should check your local ordinances or you could get satellite and how do you know they're all assholes? Have you tried them? And ARPRA and computers being given to the marketplace doesn't change the fact that corporations did much better with those technologies than the government and at no cost to the taxpayer. As for Virgin, once they get off the ground they will be able to do the same thing as NASA at, once again, no cost to the taxpayer.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 We have cable providers, so theyre not technically a monopoly.
I have ATT for cell, Verizon for net, and I know p eole with sprint, t mobile etc. They all assholes, ive heard/experienced horror stories from everyone one of t hem
The government NEVER MADE CONSUMER PRODUCTS. How can you compare that and be serious(might as well compare food to television)? The market did not create the ineternet, we all admit its important. Theyll only make progresss because of NASA
xkeltoix 2 years ago
@xkeltoix You can still get satellite. Anyway, if you don't like the big cell and net providers try some of the smaller guys. Anyway, have you ever heard of the Trabant? It's a consumer product made by the East Block in Germany during the Cold War. It was so bad that you had to put the gas and oil directly into the engine by hand and then you had to shake the car to mix the two together. That's the best government could do. And who will only make progress because of NASA?
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 Why would I, let alone ANYONE with absolute basic knowledge of networking want something as backwards as Satellite internet? I would rather deal with cable.
What does that car have to do with anything? Every government is different. Stop cherry picking. Governments have also made good mass transit, look all over europe for that. Reciting Stossell fallacies wont make things easier for you.
commercial "Nasas" piggyback off of NASA's research.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
@xkeltoix All governments are the same because the same principles apply to all of them, like the "Law of Unintended Consequences" for example. I really do love that classic line. Our government can do national socialism, communism, central economic planning, or whatever, better than other governments. It's different for us. It's the same no matter where it is. And stop being ridiculous. Most of our technologies today came from the market, not NASA. Seriously, cut the shit.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 this is why I consider you to be dogmatic. Democracies and dictatorships are the same then? i am literally rolling on the floor laughing AT you. Oh so, now our government can do certain things BETTER than otehr governments, YET THEY ARE ALL THE SAME? lol again. Its the same no matter where it is? lol x3
Really? Space craft technology was funded, created and tested not by NASA? lol x4
Pretty soon youll have a free market holiday
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Obviously you didn't actually read what I wrote. All governments are the same in that they are all subject to the laws of economics. It doesn't matter what style of government it is. Second you clearly demonstrated that you have no clue about commercial space technology. Going back to Virgin again, their basic space technology was made by an inventor who won an X Prize competition. He and his team developed the technology which Virgin bought added a little of their own tech and opened shop.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 I definitely read what you wrote, and r esponded correctly.
The "laws" you speak of, are mostly subjective.
Commercial space technology wouldnt be possible without the research NASA has done. Public funding did it first. I bet you hate that. Of course, when commercial space craft actually takes off, you guys probably wont have any problems trying to rewrite history a you just love to.
any space technology thats been made at this point owes it to nasa, or another gov. funded agency
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Oh sure, they're subjective, unless you study market behavior. Fine, ignore it, but that won't change economics. Anyway, let me say it again. The technology the space industry uses is their own. They developed their own technology from scratch or bought it from inventors who did it on their own. Most of today's space technology comes from the X Prize competition. You haven't even looked into this, you just assume. If that's the route you want to go then stop talking to me.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 market behaviors change depending behavior.depending on the regional market, if there even is one.
they USE THE RESEARCH FROM NASA.They were the first to do it they laid the ground work. if I made a prog that adds2+2. Its not totally of my own mind, someone showed me math.understand now, or do I need to spell it out in even simpler terms?Since you just said "most of todays space technology comes from x prize"I want you to PROVE that the majority of NASAs technology comes from them
xkeltoix 2 years ago
I know market behaviors change. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the laws of economics. Laws that cannot be changed by anyone.
Secondly, I was referring to the technology in the private market. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. The private market has taken a different path with its technology, one separate from NASA. The only thing they have in common are rockets, but those were invented by the Chinese. Everything else is custom.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 lol you keep backing up and changing its so funny.
Which laws specifically? and have they proven to be absolutely true 100% of the time without ANY question, ever? Doubtful.
Oh, now by "most of todays space technology" you mean "most of the PRIVATE technology" they still use the research and information NASA found out during the space race and so on. Prove they never used ANY information. Good luck. you are very very naive.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
They're called laws for a reason, because they've been proven. If you want proof, read, The Theory of Money and Credit by Ludwig Von Mises, Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles by Jesus Huerta Soto, and Choice in Currency by Friedrich Hayek. I doubt you will though.
And prove they haven't used any information? Have you even seen the launching apparatus? It's completely different from NASA.
And how am i backing up and changing and what makes me naive? If anyone's naive it's you.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 Laws such as Economic calc. Error? I am already very familiar with Mises and the bunch. They too, tend to be dogmatic. Mises isnt so bad, however, his "laws" arent really laws, and ec. calc. er. tends to be a criticism of complete state socialism. His law says Cuba should have collapsed by now. I personally think they will eventually, but the point stands.
They still know about the way NASA does things, which leads them to how thery are now.
You're naive enough to think you arent
xkeltoix 2 years ago
Mises is one of the most respected economists to ever live as well as Soto and Hayek won the Nobel Prize for Economics. You can't just throw out those credentials just because you don't agree with them. The only reason why Cuba has yet to fall is because of all the foreign aid they get, but like you said, it won't last forever.
Anyway, of course they know the way NASA does things. That doesn't mean they follow them.
I didn't say anything regarding if I am naive or not. You brought it up.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 Yes, actually I can. You just commited a logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority" your authority being the Nobel Prize. Which is a fcking joke on all levels. Did Obama deserve a Nobel Peace Prize? Its all a joke man, get with reality.
What foreign aid specifically?
Yes, they know the way NASA does things, they know the formulas and the methods they use, and they put them to use, or made advancements on those things.
Anyway, youre boring me.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
I wasn't appealing to authority. I was trying to show you that they are respected for their work and that is something.
Foreign aid, from the UN.
Lastly, the people at the X Prize looked at NASA and other government space programs and concluded that the public would never be able to use it due to the cost, so they started a competition for who could create affordable space technology that the public can use. Basically, they had to start from scratch because NASA tech was too expensive to use.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 "Soto and Hayek won the Nobel Prize for Economics. You can't just throw out those credentials just because you don't agree with them. "
Yes, you were, and you did again, by pointing out theyre respected "and that is something"
governments arent always right about everything, and i never said they used nasa's technology, but rather that they learn from it. withou nasas initiatives they wouldnt be doing this or would be even farther behind than they already are
xkeltoix 2 years ago
@xkeltoix How do you know that? How do you know they would be far behind without NASA? Nobody could ever know that unless you could somehow pull a Back to the Future. And I'm curious, if you don't accept the economic theories proposed by the economists I mentioned what economics do you accept?
sniper6081 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@sniper6081 go look at the data they provie for their technologies, and see if the equations and formulas are the same that nasa figured out.
different market systems work for different groups of people.
xkeltoix 2 years ago
They wouldn't use formulas. This has o do with aerodynamics which you can thank the Wright Brothers for. The only place where I can see them using formulas is in their rockets, but like I said rocketry is much older than NASA.
There are only two market systems, a centrally planned economy and a free market and centrally planned economies have failed abysmally time and time again. Not just over seas, but right here too. Just look at Cleveland; lot's of central planning and no prosperity.
sniper6081 2 years ago
@sniper6081 they would use mathematical formulas.... do you know anything about the subject? Everything changes once youre in space, and just because nasa didnt invent rockets does not mean rockets are exactly the same as theyve been.
Theres several market systems, anarcho capitalism, keynsianism, socialism, state socialism etc. You are wrong, again, as usuall.
Norway has a better standard of living than we do, better HDI too. Whats the excuse?
xkeltoix 2 years ago