Privatise the Government

[Denny Crane!]

KB8 I want everything privatised not ran by any government.

[Каие]

KB8 I want everything privatised not ran by any government.

Sir, that is madness!

[Georgy Zhukov]

Sir, that is madness!

Madness?


THIS-IS-CONSERVATISM!!!!!



:sparta:

It had to be done unfortunately.

[Denny Crane!]

Thats what they tell me. I think its refined madness that would be refreshing, whereas councils are just insanity mixed with stupid.

[Каие]

Thats what they tell me. I think its refined madness that would be refreshing, whereas councils are just insanity mixed with stupid.

I agree, but how do we get from there to Anarchism I.e. abolish government completely?

Madness? THIS-IS-CONSERVATISM!!!!! It had to be done unfortunately.

Privatising everything is not conservatism.

[Denny Crane!]

I agree, but how do we get from there to Anarchism I.e. abolish government completely?

Laying aside idealism for a time I'd just settle for more private services that weren't loading us up with massive public sector pensions and paying for employees to go on the sick and do govy jobs while they are 'repairing' council houses. I know a guy doing 3 govy jobs a week, tiling plastering while doing his council job.

I'm talking something that is plausible right now.

[Каие]

Laying aside idealism for a time I'd just settle for more private services that weren't loading us up with massive public sector pensions and paying for employees to go on the sick and do govy jobs while they are 'repairing' council houses. I know a guy doing 3 govy jobs a week, tiling plastering while doing his council job.

I'm talking something that is plausible right now.

These things can be fixed without complete abolishment. Think of it like a patient, who is ill. It could be hard to find out exactly what's wrong, and even harder to fix, but it's no good just shooting here and be done with it.

Some services, simply cannot be done by the private sector. For a variety of factors. These things can be fixed and reformed. it takes courage though, and patience.

[Denny Crane!]

These things can be fixed without complete abolishment. Think of it like a patient, who is ill. It could be hard to find out exactly what's wrong, and even harder to fix, but it's no good just shooting here and be done with it.

Some services, simply cannot be done by the private sector. For a variety of factors. These things can be fixed and reformed. it takes courage though, and patience.

I disagree that some things have to be done by government but we can leave that as a debate for another time.

Ending massive public sector pension benefits, cronyism and other assorted benefits that go with public sector work is political suicide and a good recipe for long strikes which is why Labour has never done it in the last ten years despite the fact that anyone who knows anything about it realises we are sitting on a financial time bomb.

Just giving equal pay to female employees could potentially bankrupt some councils (since it still hasn't happened across the board)

So what do you suggest a government does about it?

edit: Hell I'd settle for just even a small amount of privatisation.

On a complete side note I actually really liked the idea of regional assemblies until it became apparent that the people planning it were planning on lining their own pockets while making a hash of it.

[mongrel]

Laying aside idealism for a time I'd just settle for more private services that weren't loading us up with massive public sector pensions and paying for employees to go on the sick and do govy jobs while they are 'repairing' council houses. I know a guy doing 3 govy jobs a week, tiling plastering while doing his council job.

I'm talking something that is plausible right now.

Off topic but I will comment in any case. Most public sector employees earn less than the median wage, many just above the minimum wage. You will find that many public sector employess have to do two jobs, policemen, firemen, nurses in order to manage.

The larger pensions are awarded to senior and chief executives, often brought in from the private sector and paid what I personally feel are unjustifiable salaries, so as to compete with the private sector for "talent" or as we taxpayers call it, woeful performance.

They also have enormous bonuses paid when gives them every incentive to carry out change but, like bankers, no accountability for failure. The back pages of Private Eye regualrly features cowboy outfits fleecing the taxpayer whilst delivering poor or, on occasion no service. for example the NHS IT system, the implementation of with is in private hands.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...._problems.html


Some routine services like refuse collection, can be quite adequately be carried out by private firms, others through bitter experience should never have been, our railways are a prime example and the recent example involving a US firm that failed to have our kids exams marked.
We also seems to spend 100s of millions of taxpayer's money on consultants for absolutely no benefit to any service I am aware of.

I may be biased but what public servants need is good leadership, by professionals, not rank amateurs brought in to provide private sector "expertise" All the public wants is what's best for them, that works, not a disfunctional call-centre in Glasgow.


It is this obsession that public services are to be "efficient" and make money that probably drives this petty behaviour. Local government is no longer there to ensure that we get our essential services, beyond those covered by statute. We are becoming cash cows and if they can find ways of penalising us severely for putting an apple core in the paper bin, or similar, so some firm can get just a little more profit, they will do.

[Yorkshireman]

Laying aside idealism for a time I'd just settle for more private services that weren't loading us up with massive public sector pensions and paying for employees to go on the sick and do govy jobs while they are 'repairing' council houses. I know a guy doing 3 govy jobs a week, tiling plastering while doing his council job.

I'm talking something that is plausible right now.

That happens in the private sector also though. I've done loads of sub-contracting work for the highways dept, we were always nicking off with tarmac to do a driveway on the side.

That won't change by using private companies, people are always going to try and earn a few quid extra. A lot of the councils work is sub-contracted out anyway.

[Gideon Goldgod]

Thats what they tell me. I think its refined madness that would be refreshing, whereas councils are just insanity mixed with stupid.

OMG, I love your posts.
(I know I'm Suzy-come-lately to this post, but I loved this one)

[Denny Crane!]

Democracy in Greece has survived hundreds of years of foreign influence and was able to survive in face of a gigantic Persian invasion. The commonwealth of Icland started to crumble as soon as a foreign monarch who was not even particularily powerfull turned his attention to it.
While democracy is by no means perfect it is far more stable than any anarchy hs ever been.

Athenian democracy started in the year 508 BC and ended initially in 411BC with the rule of the 30 tyrants, democracy was briefly restored and in 338BC Athens and the rest of Greece was absorbed by Phillip II

Surprisingly it was a foreign power, later it was the roman empire that absorbed it. Your criticisms of Iceland fall flat on their face when compared analogously to another ambitious government form that was tried and ultimately failed due to hostile predatory states.

Athens was strong initially merely because it existed in a predatory nature having various subject states supporting it. It failed in the turbulent times just like most other governments in the violent periods of history were transitory.

Make no mistake Hitler was neither an advocate nor a result of democracy

Yet he came from a country that was democratic.

since it were Hindenburg and Schleicher who were the main responsibles of bringing Hitler into power and it was a worldwide economic crisis which served as a catalysator. Weimar didn't stumble over Hitler but over the particularily large authority given to the Reichspresident who could if he wanted rule through presidential decrees.

I'm aware of the history and it changes nothing.

What ends instability in governments and stops wars? Free trade. Its the reason why the USA and China will never go to war, their economies couldn't take it. The more open and free the trade the less profitable it is to go to war. Democracies don't create stability at all, wealth creation and trade do.

Because it is the central authority which is able to deal with threats to internal stability impartialy and consequently.

Well apparently not. We've seen a democracy destabilised as an example above.

People are neither evil nor good they are somewhat in between. The problem that exists is that anarchy offers no checks and balances against tyranny from powerfull individuals and as such is extremely unstable when compared to most other systems.

In the words of Chomsky:

As to whether Anarchism could lead to dictatorship -- first
of all, let's distinguish Anarchism from "anarchy"; I'm not in favor
of everybody doing anything they feel like -- Anarchism as *I
understand it* is a highly democratic system, it's a system -- and in
fact a highly organized, and structured system -- it's just structured
and organized *from the bottom up*. It's organized through voluntary
association, agreement, federation, up to the world [level] if you
like -- it could be a highly structured system. But's it's going to
have to come out of popular involvement. *Could* it lead to
dictatorship, well, you know --

Of course it could but then so could democracy and it has done many times in the past so your criticism is not a valid one.

For your objection to work you would need to argue that a given community would act law abidingly under a government would break down into chaos if all legal and military services were privatised. Private military companies own all their assets as opposed to a government that merely attains temporary power over their use. Its no coincidence that Israel launchs offensives at politically convenient times or that Clinton fires off rockets that a military contractor would have sold for 569000 each on the market.

Would large scale combat have broken out in the American civil war if instead of conscripting hundreds of thousands of soldiers they had to hire private individuals and pay for all the equipment and wages.

There are further arguements, that in a truly free society violent people would lose out economically and be unable to sustain their efforts to be aggressive. The arrangement of a free society is conducive to peace, if it is not the addition of a state does not help it but exasperates it as resources are more easily aquired by the state.

The good man has forgotten to take into account that this carpenter has a few tools available to create an acceptable government, that the carpenter has learned from his previous mistakes and improved his skill. Going back to anarchy would mean to discard the tools.

Obviously the author has has an ideological prison around him as he fails to realize that the alternative to anarchy is not absolutism. His whole argument is incapable of dealing with a moderately centralized system and is focused on anarchy vs absolutism.

No his is an arguement against statism in general not absolute authoritarianism. The comparison is a state or not a state, and there is either a state or there is not.

OMG, I love your posts.
(I know I'm Suzy-come-lately to this post, but I loved this one)

Thanks

[BNS]

THIS-IS-CONSERVATISM!!!!!

More like:

Anarcho-Capitalism

If I didn't find it so Utopian, I guess I could be one. It certainly deals away with this collective, exploitative, controlling hogwash.

[Denny Crane!]

Off topic but I will comment in any case. Most public sector employees earn less than the median wage, many just above the minimum wage. You will find that many public sector employess have to do two jobs, policemen, firemen, nurses in order to manage.

Bollocks, pure and utter.

At the time I knew this person I was working a 50 hour week and earning far less (-10000) than this person and managing just fine. This is newcastle here and this person was on 30000 a year which is more than most around here and he wasn't doing it to make ends meet he drove a brand new RX8.

Seriously talk specifics don't talk tripe. If they need to be paid more they should be paid more but in the North East they earn more than the average. If the government can't afford it then the value for their service isn't there. Privatise it and we'll soon se how neccessary the service is as things start to balance out.

Who on earth thinks 20k a year is a bad wage? You think it is so because of over valued assets. That is another issue.

The larger pensions are awarded to senior and chief executives, often brought in from the private sector and paid what I personally feel are unjustifiable salaries, so as to compete with the private sector for "talent" or as we taxpayers call it, woeful performance.

Did I say larger pensions? I meant the entire pensions black hole.

The pensions blackhole is in refence to all public sector employees especially local government and not the top half or the elite few, it is everyone in government pay.

They also have enormous bonuses paid when gives them every incentive to carry out change but, like bankers, no accountability for failure. The back pages of Private Eye regualrly features cowboy outfits fleecing the taxpayer whilst delivering poor or, on occasion no service. for example the NHS IT system, the implementation of with is in private hands.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...._problems.html


Some routine services like refuse collection, can be quite adequately be carried out by private firms, others through bitter experience should never have been, our railways are a prime example and the recent example involving a US firm that failed to have our kids exams marked.
We also seems to spend 100s of millions of taxpayer's money on consultants for absolutely no benefit to any service I am aware of.

The problem here is the areas were given as contracts not bought as a commodity therefore they knew they could run it into the ground and profit and then the government steps in.

I may be biased but what public servants need is good leadership, by professionals, not rank amateurs brought in to provide private sector "expertise" All the public wants is what's best for them, that works, not a disfunctional call-centre in Glasgow.

Make it a business then you'll see it.


Edited off topic from the precious thread, where all of this copied from.

[mongrel]

Bollocks, pure and utter.

At the time I knew this person I was working a 50 hour week and earning far less (-10000) than this person and managing just fine. This is newcastle here and this person was on 30000 a year which is more than most around here and he wasn't doing it to make ends meet he drove a brand new RX8.:Seriously talk specifics don't talk tripe. If they need to be paid more they should be paid more but in the North East they earn more than the average. If the government can't afford it then the value for their service isn't there. Privatise it and we'll soon se how neccessary the service is as things start to balance out.
Who on earth thinks 20k a year is a bad wage? You think it is so because of over valued assets. That is another issue.

I am fully aware of what people earn (or turnover for that matter) . You are pinning your views on individual vox pops . The fact is though, when the minimum wage was brought in it was found that that the admin assistant grade actually fell below that mark. all of them therefore had to get an instant pay rise. 20k is the kind of salary the next Civil service grade up gets after a few years experience. £30k in the North east is almost certainly either the starting pay a senior management grade or the pay of a middle manager with some years experience, hardly the typical wage of a teacher, jobcentre receptionist or clerk. How many directors or bank managers will work for less than that? Zero I guess. Recrutiment consultants earn around £18000-£50,000 per year, thats before the OTE, and I am not entirely sure why having worked with an agency on detached duty once.Dinner ladies earn £6.50 per hour in London according to the job advert place on the dinner money advert.

The fact is that salaries are diverse in both sectors. the unskilled get little , professionals a lot more and executives too much.

Did I say larger pensions? I meant the entire pensions black hole.The pensions blackhole is in refence to all public sector employees especially local government and not the top half or the elite few, it is everyone in government pay.

It has only become an issue since company pension schemes blew up, I regret I am forbidden to comment on this , but we both know what the problem was , when it happened and whose fault it is. You can't expect some policeman, nurse or dinnerlady to take the rap for this.


Are you entirely sure that the privatisation of British Rail was a good idea, or the electricity boards or British Gas? The only useful one was BT.

The Royal Mail has fallen to pieces after being run on market lines.

Traffic Wardens, remember how things were when the were on the Police payroll. Look at the situation now, the bloodthirsty leeches!

Privatization does not necessarily drive down costs to the consumer. There may be savings by way of "efficiencies" but when you take into account profit margins, loss of services and revenue lost as profits are stashed in Zug or Jersey, we the consumer gain nothing.

A good example is EDS, this is but a sample

In 2001, a £300 million PFI project to supply the UK's Ministry of Defence with a payroll system encountered serious problems which threatened to stop the pay of over 30,000 personnel. EDS could not deliver the system and was allegedly rescued by a government bailout.

In 2004, EDS was criticised by the UK's National Audit Office for its work on IT systems for the UK's CSA (Child Support Agency) which ran seriously over budget causing problems which led to the resignation of the CSA's head, Doug Smith on 2004-11-27. The system's rollout had been two years late and following its introduction in March 2003 the CSA was obliged to write off £1 billion in claims, while £750 million in child support payments from absent parents remained uncollected. An internal EDS memo was leaked that admitted that the CSA's system was "badly designed, badly tested and badly implemented". UK MPs described it as an "appalling waste of public money" and called for it to be scrapped.

In 2006, EDS' Joint Personnel Administration (JPA) system for the RAF led to thousands of personnel not receiving correct pay due to "processing errors". EDS and MoD staff were reported to have "no definitive explanations for the errors.


One thing that bothers me though. The number of pisspoor laws and petty regulations seem to be proportional to the number of outside consultants, tsars, private sector experts and other amateurs brought in as "partners" in policy making. I trust that it is not coincidental

[Denny Crane!]

I am fully aware of what people earn (or turnover for that matter) . You are pinning your views on individual vox pops . The fact is though, when the minimum wage was brought in it was found that that the admin assistant grade actually fell below that mark. all of them therefore had to get an instant pay rise.

The philosophy of a minimum wage assumes that value is subjective to wage as opposed to wages subjective to value. This ties into currency problems and everything from what I've mentioned to the reason why manufacturing is doomed to fail beyond a relatively small level in this country and why the economic centers are shifting east. I fear I'm not qualified to answer it or argue it though suffice to say the arguement holds no water for me.

20k is the kind of salary the next Civil service grade up gets after a few years experience. £30k in the North east is almost certainly either the starting pay a senior management grade or the pay of a middle manager with some years experience, hardly the typical wage of a teacher, jobcentre receptionist or clerk.

Plasterers, electricians. The person I bought my house with is a concierge on a 4day on 4day off shift and comes out with 25k a year.

An Admin assistant? 10-14k is more than their worth considering the job is low skill, low productivity and no more than a telesales person expects. You think if they are government they should get more? Npower pays 14k per year for sales, high pressure jobs in admin and sales jobs.

How many directors or bank managers will work for less than that? Zero I guess. Recrutiment consultants earn around £18000-£50,000 per year, thats before the OTE, and I am not entirely sure why having worked with an agency on detached duty once.
Dinner ladies earn £6.50 per hour in London according to the job advert place on the dinner money advert.

Directors of the council can and do earn 200k plus, whats your point or are you aiming for sensationalism here by comparing like for not like. Which is not what I was doing, I am talking about jobs where people are paid a reasonable wage based on their skills and yet can spend up to 20 hours a week doing other jobs.

I don't know what your driving at here or whether you are doing it from sheer naivety or my posts aren't clear enough... :hmmm:

The fact is that salaries are diverse in both sectors. the unskilled get little , professionals a lot more and executives too much.

Yet value is not given an out in government, salaries are set arbitrarily. Failure does not equal penalty, if we don't like it in banks why do we tolerate it in councils?

And again see above.

It has only become an issue since company pension schemes blew up, I regret I am forbidden to comment on this , but we both know what the problem was , when it happened and whose fault it is. You can't expect some policeman, nurse or dinnerlady to take the rap for this.

I know a combination of reasons but equally I also know companies are closing final salary schemes because they are unsustainable but the government knows it has a pensions time bomb on its hands that is worse than any private companies but isn't remedying it. I believe they tried but chickened out? I may be wrong but I'm sure new labour caved on this issue.

Are you entirely sure that the privatisation of British Rail was a good idea, or the electricity boards or British Gas? The only useful one was BT.

British rail wasn't properly privatised, utilities I can argue quite successfully if you wish but also I can do it on a more general them based on utilities depending on what you want. If British Rail isn't viable as a private company it shouldn't exist and innovation will inevitably come up with something better because demand will exist. If we are to delve into the minutae of exactly where governments go wrong with privatisation attempts it could be interesting if 10000 pages long.

FYI BT might have been successful but it isn't without its problems either. Anti competition rules are quite the joke within the company, and quite stupid at times (hence the humour)

The Royal Mail has fallen to pieces after being run on market lines.

Perhaps its not a viable business?

Traffic Wardens, remember how things were when the were on the Police payroll. Look at the situation now, the bloodthirsty leeches!

Not surprised under council mandate, look at speed cameras similarly.

Privatization does not necessarily drive down costs to the consumer. There may be savings by way of "efficiencies" but when you take into account profit margins, loss of services and revenue lost as profits are stashed in Zug or Jersey, we the consumer gain nothing.

If the value isn't there then competition will ensure something better comes along, unless there is state intereference in competition. If it isn't working then the option is there to create something better and the opportunity is there to drop the thing that is bad value.

I can't drop my current council and all its ridiculous initiatives, except for a ludicrously small chance I might be able to bring in a council with different ludicrous initiatives.

I haven't actually got a choice.

[Каие]

Seneca, privatisation drives up wages and costs. Businesses compete for the best employees and managers etc. Like banks, offering obscene amounts + bonuses. Privatisation only serves to cut government expenditure, but by definition, the civil service cannot be privatised. It is an ornament of the state, which is supposed to carry out government policy. It's simply madness to put the enacting of government policy into the hands of foreigners and profiteers.

They are trying to do this is in the Army by outsourcing everything to civie contractors. I knew a guy in the RAF, worked in air traffic control or intelligence or some desk job anyway. he was sick of his low salary, so he quit the force and joined a civie contractor working for the RAF, next morning same desk, same job. Twice as much in wage.

[Denny Crane!]

Seneca, privatisation drives up wages and costs. Businesses compete for the best employees and managers etc. Like banks, offering obscene amounts + bonuses.

No it drives costs down. I know its fiction but this is a perfect example:



In councils you have employees on the sick for six months working for two weeks and then on the sick for six months. Don't tell me it doesn't happen I witness it. Not in some report in real life.

Privatisation only serves to cut government expenditure, but by definition, the civil service cannot be privatised. It is an ornament of the state, which is supposed to carry out government policy. It's simply madness to put the enacting of government policy into the hands of foreigners and profiteers.

How about forgetting civil service and forgetting government aims and just having sevices that people pay for.

Problems with landfill and private firms putting to much packaging on their products, put garbage in private hands and make it cost people directly and they'll start objecting to packaging a little more directly.

They are trying to do this is in the Army by outsourcing everything to civie contractors. I knew a guy in the RAF, worked in air traffic control or intelligence or some desk job anyway. he was sick of his low salary, so he quit the force and joined a civie contractor working for the RAF, next morning same desk, same job. Twice as much in wage.

Oh dear lord you didn't just compare a private company to a private company contracted by the government. PFI's, consultancy etc etc.

If you think they are the same thing... well I got nothing if you think that. If you can't see where the problem is there I can't help you.

[Каие]

No it drives costs down. I know its fiction but this is a perfect example:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

What makes you think governments can't cut bureaucracy? The New Labour way is not the only way you know. They love their quangos and what-not with a whole bunch of paperwork, unnecessary employees and red tape after red tape, to the extent they have reduced the once proud civil service into a bureaucratic haemorrhaging monster. Where once 12 men administered the whole of India, 5,000 can't even do our waste collection.

The issue can be fixed by the right government.

As for your video, no, greed is not good, or right. Greed, in fact, is the cause of the aforementioned problem. Senior civil servants get bloody ridiculous pensions and wages, and as was leaked in the newspapers last week, perks. Wimbledon , Rugby World Cup. God-damn disgrace. All from greed.

In councils you have employees on the sick for six months working for two weeks and then on the sick for six months. Don't tell me it doesn't happen I witness it. Not in some report in real life.

What you;re trying to convince me is that in our local councils, there are employees who get paid a years salary for two weeks work? Obviously, it's a gross exaggeration, but tell me, what makes you think in a private business there is no absenteeism? Especially for a job as boring as the modern civil service?

How about forgetting civil service and forgetting government aims and just having services that people pay for.

So who will run the economy? and Military? and free Education system? and the free healthcare system?

Problems with landfill and private firms putting to much packaging on their products, put garbage in private hands and make it cost people directly and they'll start objecting to packaging a little more directly.

Again, this can be done by the right government, not necessarily by private companies.

Oh dear lord you didn't just compare a private company to a private company contracted by the government. PFI's, consultancy etc etc. If you think they are the same thing... well I got nothing if you think that.

My mistake. I had no Idea that a private company once it wins a government contract, becomes operationally retarded and can no longer be classed as a private company.

[Thanatos]

KB8 I want everything privatised not ran by any government.

That's scary.