The more functionality is in the public purse, the larger the government and, the conservative argument goes, there is less competition than one would achieve in a privatized system.
Examples of society in transition
The British Royal Mail is about to be privatized. One can see parallels in the United States where this previous government monopoly has been selectively outperformed by private industry. The pre-existing mail services, committed to a wide-range of functionality, proved unable to adapt to the disruptive effect of the internet. The new, and nimble, were able to select a profitable section of the service and wrest it away.
Sometimes transition isn't from public to private. Obamacare moves towards universal care by providing government alternatives to private insurance. But this only one facet of the National Health Insurance system in the United Kingdom which more comprehensively supports universal insurance, hospitals, medicines, and patient care. The difference in care is such that, in the National Health system you can visit a hospital or clinic and get relief without need to investigate whether you have insurance. In the US, insurance is related to being employed, effectively creating worker serfdom.
When Margaret Thatcher privatized the public housing estates that were created in post-war Britain, she probably did a good thing by encouraging previous tenants, now owners (or at least mortgagees) to take pride in their ownership and, at the same time reduce big government. The problem was that she insisted the energy industry, the grid, was also privatized and sold off (despite the fact that the infrastructure had been developed as part of the public purse by taxes). The buyers were the French state energy sector, so Britain now has a privatized energy industry largely owned by the French State.
So what should be public and what privatized?
It is important to examine what corporations do. They maximize profit without any moral obligation to customers. They offer services and goods at a price the market will bear. They are mostly short-sightedly concentrated in making an immediate profit rather than investing in long-term research. So basic needs and requirements often cost more and are less comprehensive when in the hands of the corporations rather than the public.
It is also important to tally some of what the public purse does -- Public education (except where schools are privatized, favoring the rich) -- Research and development of national-wide systems such as the internet -- Training to produce airline pilots and other technicians-- Defense (except when it is outsourced to private corporations) -- Supporting societal transitions such as from dirty to renewable energy
How do you keep them down on the Farm?
Agribusiness is big business and the corporations are heavily subsidised by the government. Consider, huge swathes of land are given over to subsidized corn. Huge quantities of phosphates are used and the run-off poisons the rivers and, ultimately, the Gulf of Mexico. Unfortunately, corn is so over exploited for subsidised, corporate profit that additional uses have been invented:
High fructose corn syrup is added to everything from soft drinks to canned peas. The result is obesity, diabetes, and a huge burden on the rest of the economy.
Corn is fed to cattle kept in high intensive industrial growth centers. The result is so toxic, it has to be countered by huge amounts of anti-biotics and meat growth encouraged by hormones.
Corn produces ethanol, a car fuel whose time is past. The future is with solar and wind generation of electricity and the era of electric cars is here.
So, here we have a subsidy situation, the Farm Bill, originally intended for small farmers, whose aims have been subverted by the amorality of big-business. Of course, the other aspect of the Farm Bill, food stamps, are always a subject for conservatives to attack, and reduce.
Transitions
Government can provide the leadership to overcome social and corporate inertia.
Considering energy, the oil companies have vested billions in fixed assets for refining, production and transportation of oil product. They have fought a successful war against the railways and diversification. Even now, they are encouraging use of Canadian tar sands, fracking, and natural gas in order to hold the status quo and prevent radical change. The conversion to electric transportation power and the development of efficient public transportation, both necessary to reduce carbon emission, can only be achieved by a combination of carrot and stick wielded by government subsidies, support, and law.
Another transition which will inevitably occur and which will require government intervention has been created by the process of corporate efficiency. The recovery from the 2007 banking failure has been for all but middle class workers. Automation has kept unemployment higher than ever before and automation of production will continue at an accelerating pace. It begs the question...if production depends on available consumers and those consumers no longer have jobs, how is the economic cycle to continue?
Are the so-called "one percent" going to continue to get richer and richer, demanding smaller government that subsidises the chronically unemployed? And is the future of this new underclass going to be taking in each others washing to survive?
A Socialist Future?
Nanotechnology, genetic engineering, network computing, global-weather change, and automation are so disruptive that only government has the capability and, dare one imagine, the moral capability of managing such change.
During the recent crisis, many conservatives accused the current administration of socialism which had taken over control of various banks and car production companies. They had nationalized the debt, rather than the banks themselves. The bankers had been previously left to their own devices to dream up get rich quick schemes with attention only to short term profit and bonuses and...
...when they had created such complexity, it collapsed the economic system and the government had to step in to mitigate the pain to the public by restructuring. There will be much more intervention in the future. The Affordable Care Act is just a small beginning.
I declare the American Dream officially died around the turn of the millennium.
The current penchant for zombie movies is our contemporary equivalent of the prior public interest in UFOs at the time of the Cold War...it is our poetic soul, our collective unconscious, trying to make sense of a frightening situation. Only it is we who are the zombies -- the corporate world has rendered us so. Our salvation is in cleaving to democratic, citizen-led, government.
We are the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment