• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why not? What would you define as civil services, and why would you then let other industries and sectors be run by the private either through government contracts or free enterprise. But as I said, I am not supporting either of them in this discussion, I am just saying that it is much easier to blaming something because it is private, and that you should make up arguments for why you would want it or not. Set up a list of pro and contra :) And most likely it will be that you're scared of profit incentive, and think negative of it. It is then based upon emotions rather than logic - doesn't say that is necessairly a bad thing.

Fair enough, I suppose in truth I have struggled with idea that profit incentive is any more than a necessary evil at the best of times! :eek:o
I have to thank you for making me recognize my unfortunate great assumption that most of the blame should be laid on the private sector at all times :eek:o
 
Public sector rely on a greater degree on the private sector. As it is the private sector that stand for the most employment, and it is they who produce the most and demand the most (both in private and public sector) and more importantly it is from them the government actually get taxes which they can then use on the public sector. The private sector is only reliant on the public sector in terms of resources and services the government have monopolized. But they would have gotten that without the government, but the public sector wouldn't have gotten subsidues and budgets without the taxation from the private, and their demand after their products and services and what they supply them with.

I kind of misspoke there! I meant to say that they have a rather symbiotic relationship. :)
 
I kind of misspoke there! I meant to say that they have a rather symbiotic relationship. :)

Sure? The private sector will exist without the public sector. The public sector can only exist with a private one (aasuming we are not a planned economy - unless you count individuals as part of the private market). Still doesn't make it a valid argument for why the entire economy should be decentralized and in the hands of the private. But the public sector is reliant on the private, but the private is only reliant on the private sector.
 
Sure? The private sector will exist without the public sector. The public sector can only exist with a private one (aasuming we are not a planned economy).

What about the enforcement of laws and contracts/protection of property? I have usually thought of that as a public sector thing.

For the most part Private security does exist, but it can not enforce the kind of stability needed to allow the private sector to thrive.

Am I off base here?
 
Mixed Economy is best economy.

Wealthy Aristocrats own the private sector.
The Government owns the rest.

Easy as pie. A blueberry pie that is. Apple is Communist, obviously.
 
What about the enforcement of laws and contracts/protection of property? I have usually thought of that as a public sector thing.

Well you can think of that as public sector. I am more thinking of it as the government however. That may be argued to be only making society and the market function properly. Of course the private sector would exist even without governments (before others form governments, or government like things of course), but it function better with government. In that case you can be argued to be correct, but then only when it comes to the basic and key functions of the government to secure negative rights and private enterprises/property (either a factory, home or your own body) and to limit and prevent crimes.
 
By that logic every road building company, every company handling dams, and other industries and infrsstructure on government contracts are doing a poor job and violate standards for money.
They dont do a poor job perse but they will do there best to avoid meeting standards, that might be limited. A example of this is patch and seal jobs, overtime patch and seal jobs are more expensive then building new roads but its cheaper short term for road repair contracts.

Interestingley enough this is not the case, and private companies working for the government through government contracts have proven to be more effective (quality and cost wise) than if the government would do it on it's own.
NHS vs US healthcare.

You seem to think that profit seeking in itself is bad. Let me ask you, do you think that the baker bake bread to make money or to be solidatary? And if he had been violating standards to esrn more money, what would that result in? It would result in his costumers going away from him, or maybe he violating laws which will give him a sue against him or even prison. This would not let him earn money, but instead loose them.

The profit incetive make him want to produce better bread than his rivals. This way his customers are pleased by getting good bread, and he is pleased by getting money.
If he breaks standards all the time he will get caught, but he will do his darnest to cut corners.

Now for prisons, the government run prisons are also dependent on money. They are also set up with a budget, and are ironically sued by the state if they use too much money or doesn't meet their demands. So here it is a whip that is scaring them to do a good job, while for private companies it is a carrot that are encouraging them to do a good job.
which is why we need to give prisons generous budgets for rehabilitation.

And they are encouraged through several factors. Take for example the natural monopolies the state are delegating to private contractors. Here the state for example say that they want a 2km highway. Then different companies will makeproposals to show the state how they will do it. The state will choose the most cost effective one, and if the company are sloppy and doesn't follow they regulations and requirements they won't be hired. If they follow their standards they will be hired. Let us now assume that due to the profit incentive they are lying and want to rush it by mixing their cement with corn or something. Okay, the road is finished but the government can see that they are cheating through supervision or when the road is finished. What will happen then (depending on the stage) is that the contract is terminated and they need to cover the costs. That means a loss in profits. Also they would maybe need to pay great fines according to the contract they have broken or illegal actions. Worst case scenario many of the leaders might go to jail for fraud and criminal activity.
Again, they do there darnest to cut corners, this may be limited.
 
enewald and dadarian may have more in common than we think?
4699696.jpg

fffffffffrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeddddddddddoooooooooommmmmmmmmm
 
They dont do a poor job perse but they will do there best to avoid meeting standards, that might be limited. A example of this is patch and seal jobs, overtime patch and seal jobs are more expensive then building new roads but its cheaper short term for road repair contracts.

NHS vs US healthcare.

If he breaks standards all the time he will get caught, but he will do his darnest to cut corners.

which is why we need to give prisons generous budgets for rehabilitation.

Again, they do there darnest to cut corners, this may be limited.

Give me something more than simple sentences everyone can say ;)
 
Well you can think of that as public sector. I am more thinking of it as the government however. That may be argued to be only making society and the market function properly. Of course the private sector would exist even without governments (before others form governments, or government like things of course), but it function better with government. In that case you can be argued to be correct, but then only when it comes to the basic and key functions of the government to secure negative rights and private enterprises/property (either a factory, home or your own body) and to limit and prevent crimes.

I can see how that could be the case, I kind of rolled all the government thing into the public sector in my definition to give the public sector more heft :eek:o, The united states is a scary place and you need to pull all the stops to stop everything from being privatized or defunded. :sigh:
 
I can see how that could be the case, I kind of rolled all the government thing into the public sector in my definition to give the public sector more heft :eek:o, The united states is a scary place and you need to pull all the stops to stop everything from being privatized or defunded. :sigh:

Well then I understand why you reasoned as such :)

Are we going to have a citation fight because we're already pretty on a tangent.

Well he need to provide better and more 'advanced' (in lack of a better term) arguments than "Again, they do there darnest to cut corners, this may be limited." as everyone can make them, and it isn't providing any debate materials, both in terms of new arguments and that he is just saying what I argued against. He can just say "no" instead, and it would mean the exact same thing. It will then just result in him saying "profit suxx!" and I saying "profit rulezz, and can also suxx" in an infinitive circle.
 
Well then I understand why you reasoned as such :)



Well he need to provide better and more 'advanced' (in lack of a better term) arguments than "Again, they do there darnest to cut corners, this may be limited." as everyone can make them, and it isn't providing any debate materials. He can just say "no" and "yes" instead, and it would mean the exact same thing.

I get you, At least this polite page filler :D
 
I'm not doing that on a roleplay on a gaming forum. :p
 
Yeah, this thread won't be the primary battle ground for the future of the american prison system. If it was I think many of us would bring our A- game.

This is the thread congress will base it's federal prison system on ;) That being said I was only arguing against the notion that profits=bad for the sake of profits being bad. I wasn't arguing for or against private prisons.

And we go a very off topic discussion it seems :p BattleBunny what did you start? Damn commies! :laugh: Just joking with that of course :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.