Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
But how is it judged to be not performing? If the opinion polls are down you need a boost. This government can't fix it? Cya later. Doesn't this just make the rich richer?
Don't assume that privatisation is always politically acceptable. It aint.
It doesn't even have to turn a profit. It just has to be in the ballpark. The alternative is that the rich get richer. And if that happens we're all paying higher taxes anyway so the savings are irrelevant.
I don't assume that. I assume that when it is governments will take advantage of it.
There's nothing wrong with the rich getting richer if they're creating jobs. Plus governments can't afford to pay a decent pension these days, and the average punter only invests in superannuation - which means wealthy corporations. You better hope they're getting richer.
There's nothing wrong with concentrating more of our wealth in fewer individuals? Were they screened for the benevolence gene? And if governments can't afford to pay a decent pension these days maybe it's got something to do with having sold everything off.
You know the whole world gets richer all the time, right? Even the poorest people have more stuff than they used to.
No it's due to ageing populations - more welfare recipients every year, and correspondingly fewer taxpayers to look after them.
So what? How is that an argument for concentrating wealth?
Because it benefits everyone. Most 'wealth' is arbitrary numbers created because a thing (goods or services) was invented that somebody was able to pay a lot of money for. Without money concentrated in the hands of few, there is plenty of stuff that wouldn't exist, and consequently plenty of people without jobs. The only thing worse than being exploited by capitalism is not being exploited by capitalism. That is the state where you find yourself unable to help make things that other merkins want to buy.
I don't really see it as at anyone's expense. If we were alive five thousand years ago we would still be working hard just to survive, only we would have a lot less stuff. I'm doing ok financially (I would prefer to be doing better, because I'm a greedy, jealous merkin) but I recognise that I am doing well precisely because I have helped make some wealthier merkins even wealthier.
I'm not convinced it's as clear cut as you suggest. If it was we'd have privatised everything long ago and we'd all be loaded. But that aside, wealth is also power, so by making the rich richer comparatively means the average Joe is less powerful and more reliant on the rich guys playing by the book. But keep the high priced hookers, I don't want Bernie to go off the rails just yet.
