HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Papantonio: Privatization...

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:42 PM

Papantonio: Privatization Always Leads To Rampant Corruption

Mike Papantonio appears on The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann to talk about the dangers of privatizing everything, and how KBR has become the poster child for privatization and corruption.

13 replies, 1432 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply Papantonio: Privatization Always Leads To Rampant Corruption (Original post)
GoLeft TV Jan 2013 OP
liberal N proud Jan 2013 #1
freshwest Jan 2013 #5
FiveGoodMen Jan 2013 #2
freshwest Jan 2013 #6
siligut Jan 2013 #3
Baitball Blogger Jan 2013 #4
Blanks Jan 2013 #7
FiveGoodMen Jan 2013 #8
Blanks Jan 2013 #10
FiveGoodMen Jan 2013 #11
Blanks Jan 2013 #12
FiveGoodMen Jan 2013 #13
Wednesdays Jan 2013 #9

Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:57 PM

1. Privatization Always Leads To Rampant Corruption

YES IT DOES!

The corrupt are always pushing to privatize another public service so they can get rich off of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:01 PM

5. And everyone of their peons votes against levies for public services, unless they get the contract.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:05 PM

2. Reminds me of this

Genesis 25:29-34

Now Jacob cooked a stew; and Esau came in from the field, and he was weary.

And Esau said to Jacob, “Please feed me with that same red stew, for I am weary.” ...

But Jacob said, “Sell me your birthright as of this day.”

And Esau said, “Look, I am about to die; so what is this birthright to me?”

Then Jacob said, “Swear to me as of this day.”
So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.

And Jacob gave Esau bread and stew of lentils; then he ate and drank, arose, and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.


That's pretty much what it's like when we sell off our land, water, rights, etc -- forever -- just to get a quick, one-time payday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:02 PM

6. That is exactly how it works!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:22 PM

3. How do we get the guilty parties to feel the repercussions?

Until then, money will continue trump all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:26 PM

4. Yes! Yes! Yes!

It really does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:27 PM

7. Privatization isn't always bad.

Yes, it has been abused, and KBR is the poster child. The problem isn't privatization as much as it is the influence of money in politics.

Things like the interstate highway system and Hoover Dam would never have been built if it weren't for government contracts with private companies. Sometimes the government needs a lot of people for a short period of time, and it isn't practical to hire all government employees to complete the task.

Privatization abuse is a symptom of allowing monopolies to exist that were prevented in times gone by. They are a problem currently because the tax code allows high paid executives to siphon off the profits from government contracts while abusing employees.

We should never have privatization in war zones and we should never have privatization without strong government oversight, but there are successful examples of privatization; I think the problems inherent in privatization are as a result of the other issues that I've mentioned and, as a concept, not necessarily always bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blanks (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:16 PM

8. "government contracts with private companies"

That's not what privatization means.

"Things like the interstate highway system and Hoover Dam would never have been built if it weren't for government contracts with private companies."

Who owns the Hoover Dam?

That's what matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:32 AM

10. According to Wikipedia; that's what it means.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization

Privatization, also spelled privatisation, may have several meanings. Primarily, it is the process of transferring ownership of a business, enterprise, agency, public service or public property from the public sector (a government) to the private sector, either to a business that operate for a profit or to a non-profit organization. It may also mean government outsourcing of services or functions to private firms, e.g. revenue collection, law enforcement, and prison management.


Although I agree with you that in most cases it's better if the government continues ownership of the facilities. I think having a 'zero tolerance policy' approach is just as bad.

Again, as long as there is oversight preventing corruption and tax policy to create a disincentive to siphoning; privatization isn't the problem. Electric utilities are owned by either government or the private sector and very often the individual user can't tell.

Government ownership can be politicized and very often private firms can innovate in ways that the government can't because of public opinion.

I agree we have too much privatization right now (and some of it needs to be eliminated), but I don't agree that it is always bad. I'd like to see it scaled back, but not eliminated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blanks (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:49 PM

11. "innovate in ways that the government can't because of public opinion"

When we're talking about our national resources, public opinion should carry the day.

The private innovations will always be for the benefit of a few private individuals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:56 PM

12. I agree with that.

However, it isn't always about natural resources. When I refer to oversight; I'm talking about agencies like the EPA and state environmental quality agencies; they need to have the resources to stop environmental abuse.

Even in the case of the environment though; a few people shouldn't be able to derail a project that benefit a lot of people.

Wind turbines are an example. There are environmental groups opposed to wind turbines. I'd prefer to have a strong pro-environmental quality government entity control environmental concerns rather than purely public opinion. At least then it is responsive to elected officials.

When it comes to private vs public; if a project needs an expensive piece of equipment (or software) to perform a particular function, people will find out about it and throw a fit; holding up a project. If a contractor needs something to complete a task; the expense comes out of the project and doesn't come directly out of government funds, and the project can proceed despite taxpayer objections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blanks (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:40 PM

13. Okay, I see your point.

Looks like we're not too far apart on this.

Anyway, MY big issue issue here is simply that we (all of us, the US) should own the 'gifts that keep on giving' -- waterways, roads, parks, power grids, power plants (power should be all of ours), and so on.

Whenever we sell these things off, we get a single check followed by an eternity of higher bills from the folks who now own them (and therefore pretty much own us).

Yes, industry is sometimes more efficient, but the benefits go to stockholders, not the general public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:44 PM

9. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread