Wow, Chris! "idiot Mayor"
"Open doors for bribes" "maximize profits for fatcats." So you do understand the way governments operate! No wonder you prefer competitive private enterprise where if they copy government by doing the above, you fire them. You can't fire government. Harry ******************************** Henry George School of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 9104 818 352-4141 ******************************** -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christoph Reuss Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 6:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Futurework] private fire services Harry wrote: > It was a government service that allowed the house to burn. Only because some idiot mayor didn't know how to fund government services (with taxes, not fees). But that's not how a gov't service is supposed to be run. > Just as it is a government service that could repossess your house if > you don't pay your property taxes. I don't own a house and I think that all real estate should be owned by the community, some of it leased to appropriate users. > A city doesn't have several fire companies competing with one another. > That's silly. > > They contract with the company that provides the best service at the > best price. If it doesn't do a good job, they fire it and hire another What kind of "competition" is that? Open doors for bribes to get that monopoly, that's what it is. And to cut corners (externalize costs) in order to keep that monopoly and maximize profits for fatcats. And how many people do you want to die in fires before the city managers will realize that they hired the wrong company? And do you know how much it costs to change fire services? No way of saving money with such a concept. Which is why the fatcats who profit from these companies are pushing it down people's throats. > something not possible with a government service. Something not NECESSARY with a government service. As long as some idiot mayor doesn't try to privatize it or its funding, anyway. > The "dumb trick" is the kind of thing that governments do, yet you > seem to want to use them. No, I want the fire service to be funded from general taxes, not fees. > I'll repeat that almost 9 out of 10 fire services in the US are > volunteer or mainly volunteer. Privatization is about profiteering. Volunteer work is not! > All your ramblings about competing fire services serving the community > are imagination. You confuse monopoly with competition. Replacing a state monopoly by a private monopoly makes things worse! It also contradicts your earlier statement that monopolies should not be privatized. > There is no case against private fire-fighting. See above. > I'm sorry to confuse you with facts. Your dogmas are contradictions. > Invariably, when the State decides to "provide" a profitable service, > it rapidly turns unprofitable. An "unprofitable" service can only be made "profitable" by externalizing costs to the community, environment, future generations, other countries, etc. -- i.e. transferring money from the many to the few superrich (owners and shareholders of the private companies). The state must prevent that, not promote it. Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
