I’m sorry.
To Privatize…
-
defense should definantly be privatized, the role of the government is to defend us so they should have the control.
-
oh, insurance should be nationalized too.
defense should definantly be privatized, the role of the government is to defend us so they should have the control.
unless im mixing up my terms, privatized is controlled by private citizens, as opposed to nationalized being controlled by the govt? in which case this is an error? please tell me if im wrong
anyway, defense should not be govt controlled, because having it as private industry serves our purposes much better. it creates competition, something that wouldnt occur if it were purely govt controlled.
-
Yeah, i think the creator mixed up his words. He means nationalize industries. I personnally think several industries should be nationalized: healthcare, including pharmacuticals, defense, education (college), transportation, and energy and all means of acquiring them, such as coal mining, etc. I also think nationalizing agriculture could be very beneficial, since today farmers often have to hold several jobs to stay afloat. Would make food doles much easier if we needed them as well. Insurance is a good idea, i would antionalize that too. Save doctors alot of headaches if you dont want to nationalize healthcare.
As for competition in regards to defense, you could simply have two or three different divisions within the governement, and reward those who succeed at developing the product. Give them a goal and a deadline, and let them go at it. China currently employs this system, and their military is advancing at a rapid pace. Their best tanks are better than ours although not as numerous, and their airforce is developing fighters that are as advanced, and maybe more so, than America’s. Defense is one of the few industries to be consistently capable of being nationalized effectively. -
sorry, its the topic title that was screwing me up
-
as the “sociallist” from the north, i feel like i should add something . . . .
Healthcare - definitely should be a nationalized service. Here it is (unfortunately) administered fairly inefficiently on a provincial level and even on a regional level. Still we pay MUCH less for health care with more coverage and better results than the US, and i figured this out pretty easily.
With private hospitals, you introduce money-consuming entities such as marketing and profits/dividends to shareholders. With the need for all of this money, it really constrains health care providers. Also with the number of insurance companies and the variety of plans, doctor’s hands are often tied in the amount and kind of care they may provide in hospitals. Add to the fact that nearly a quarter of the population is uninsured, and you have something that is getting out of control.
Defence obviously needs to be in the hands of an elected gov’t. Telecommunications as well need gov’t involvement to ensure accessibility to all regions - not just the big money ones.
Pharmaceuticals - nationalizing these would be extremely expensive, and i am not sure that gov’t would keep from limiting their potential. Energy - i agree, should have a considerable degree of gov’t involvement as typically it is garnered from nationalized resources and lands. Also there is less concern of business interests interfering with their provision of services.
Other than these, i think that gov’t should step in only where absolutely necessary, or where industry appears to be hurting the population through hubris, etc. -
i dont think health care should be nationalized, your helth is your responsibility, not the gevernments. so eat an apple a day and youll be all set :D
-
Electricity definately needs to be government run. And while we’re at it, lets make it all Nuclear instead of Fossil Fuels…
-
Yeah, i think the creator mixed up his words. He means nationalize industries.
yes this is what I mean… sorry for confusion…
GG
-
@marine36:
i dont think health care should be nationalized, your helth is your responsibility, not the gevernments. so eat an apple a day and youll be all set :D
i hope your grin implies a consideration that things are not this simple.
The fact is that ANYONE can and will be subject to a crashing medical health problem - whether it happens to them personally, or to a loved one. This may subject you to a one-time payout of between $2000-$500 000 depending on the nature of the problem, as well as the hospital stay. Most of North America is between 1 and 3 paychecks from bankruptcy, meaning that nearly any health incident without appropriate coverage could utterly bankrupt a person or family. Now i realize this is a worst case scenario as many Americans are covered by health insurance/medic-aid. Still - often this is not enough as insurance companies ignore a physician’s intuition when it comes to tests and treatments, with sub-par medical treatment for some patients.
The fact is that a healthy population by consideration of all determinants of health is a productive population that saves the gov’t fortunes in ancilliary costs - lost productivity, jail time, bankruptcy, prisons, education, etc. -
i know. the problem is people dont want to eat healthy because junk food tastes so good. i rarely get sick, its probably all the tofu my mom made me eat when i was younger.
-
I believe that everthing, inluding my tooth brush should be nationalized (or more correctly, LIBERATED, from the yoke of its capitalist taskmaster).
-
Open markets are good. They endorse competition that keeps prices low and my bank account high. The more supply, the cheaper the product.
-
Open markets are good. They endorse competition that keeps prices low and my bank account high. The more supply, the cheaper the product.
this is a nice theory.
They still need to be regulated.
Open competition is good, however the most efficient way to win a game is by killing your opponant. This is why we need rules in games. -
CC, when is the last time you saw Wal mart and Target Nukin it out? :-?
Murder is regulated by national law and therefore not even a section of the game…
It is nice in theory and actuality… What we don’t need is Canadian Competition :wink: :lol: J/K
GG
-
@Guerrilla:
CC, when is the last time you saw Wal mart and Target Nukin it out? :-?
Murder is regulated by national law and therefore not even a section of the game…
GGagain missing the point.
-
@cystic:
@Guerrilla:
CC, when is the last time you saw Wal mart and Target Nukin it out? :-?
Murder is regulated by national law and therefore not even a section of the game…
GGagain missing the point.
game=Market!
-
@Guerrilla:
game=Market!
but you took murder too literally.
-
oh ok… but logically you are trying to defeat your opponent… how will regulating the market help? it will destroy competition, profits, and low prices…
GG
-
It sets up rules. And without these rules being enforced, why should you stick to agreements? Why would i pay anything and not run away with my (then stolen) goods? As long as i am sure i will never have to deal with that person again, that is the most profitable way to go for me.
How can a market function if there is noone overseeing the basic principles (that are usually taken for granted, but effectively are control)?
-
F_alk - right. The question is, at what point are the regulations too much. When does gov’t guidence become gov’t interference? What are appropriate taxation levels, and how much help do the socio-economically disadvantaged deserve?
Not looking for an answer - just looking to demonstrate that i’m not a communist to the free-market USies here.