Re: public vs private

[Charu datt <charuX@lucent.com>]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cprakash wrote:

 > Exploitation is when the advertised price ( or rather the price as
 > the government writes on its brochures ) is Rs 100 and you have to
 > pay a bribe of Rs 200 to get your work done.

Exploitation is also [as in the US] when all funeral companies collude to
set a minimum coffin price at $5000. will not give prices over the phone,
will bribe local politicians to pass laws that only they- licensed
morticians may transport a body so that they can charge you anything they
please, and more recently attempting to ban coffin sales over the net. The
free[er] market  in the US does much worse in terms of services and much
much better in terms of profits- at least in terms of corporate profits-
check the stock performance of service corp international [mega-funeral
company] over the last 20 years.

 > > generally this is never the case because
 > >large systems always have a certain amount of inertia.
 >
 > Which is the larger system, a government or a company ? so, using
 > your own inertia argument,

depends on which government and which company. there are lots of companies
larger [in revenues anyway] and more powerful than lots of governments.

 > which will respond to your needs better ?

generally, when they are large and powerful, neither.

 > The monopolies which are held are held in collusion with big
 > government will get demolished in a free-market system.

in a capitalist utopia... and in a socialist utopia "...the state will
wither away" fat chance- that either will happen

 > Have you
 > noticed that among the biggest supporters of regulation in the US has
 > been big business ?

at least we agree on something

 > the biggest support to the setting up of their
 > federal reserve and taking away true economic power (gold)from the
 > hands of the people had been big banks - goldamn sachs, rothschilds,
 > etc.

ah, so going back to the gold standard is the solution for our problems? how
will gold be transmitted over the internet?

 > The devilish scheme of socialism has been to establish the
 > corporation as the symbol of free-market, to be feared because of its
 > size and curbed because of its power.

likewise the "devlish" scheme of corporate power is to curb
any public instituition that questions theirs and curbs the
growth of their power- examples abound.

 >
 > >the problem i would like to see discussed is how we can design
 > >social systems, involving the public and private, that have low
 > >time-constants i.e. are responsive to public needs in a more timely
 > fashion
 > >in a manner that serves the maximum number over the greatest period,
 > and
 > >what are the catalysts to bring this about.
 >
 > simple, scrap regulation. scrap government control over everything
 > and you will achieve your ideal.

see my other post on the possibilities of profitable public instituitions.

 > .......My idea of a "Profit" may vary
 > from yours. I like strawberry, you like choclate, what is the
 > problem ?

i believe the generally accepted definition of profit is financial-
certainly in the context we're discussing- the corporation.

 >
 >
 > >The stated purpose of publicly owned instituitions
 > >is not to generate profits but to serve public needs-
 > >[it is another matter whether they do serve in practice]
 >
 > that is the exact matter, sir. hasn't 50 years of india taught you
 > ANYTHING ?
 >
 > >i'm arguing that this is a "valid philosophical position" (quotes
 > mine _c.p )
 >
 > AM I HEARING "MORAL HIGH GROUND" HERE ? DIDN'T THE SOCIALISTS LOSE
 > THAT AFTER HITLER,STALIN, MAO AND POL POT ?

spare me the posturing and ranting-i don't moralize, i expect what i say to
stand or fall on its content not by vague invocation of context.

 > ...... NO ACTIVITY IS WORTHY UNLESS IT
 > GENERATES PRIVATE GAIN/HAPPINESS/PROFIT. I take care of my parents
 > because i love them. That does provide me happiness, sir. Don't
 > equate profit with money at hand.

"happiness" is not profit- certainly not in the definition of corporation's
objectives and certainly not in common usage of the english language. taking
care of your parents does not generate "profits"- proving my point- some
activities are done for motivations
other than profit.

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            ../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------