Harry Pollard wrote: > We have thousands of bridges and other government constructions that are > seriously under-maintained. You have thousands of patients who are all > right so long as the hospitals don't run out of corridors to store them.
Who do you mean by "You have.." ? I haven't seen any hospitals where the patients are being stored in the corridors. > That's a good argument against government. Thanks Chris. It isn't one, nor did I provide one. > I am as much against privatization as you probably are. What is needed is > competition. Competition is only good to some extent, not to the maximum of "race to the bottom" (or back to monopolies thru merger-mania). It's the dosis that makes the poison... > The reason why government operations are so inefficient is > because of the lack of competition. A healthy dosis of competition can occur by the existence of various political parties (or personalities) whose policies compete with each other in a democracy, and with public participation at various levels (referendums etc.). And no, I'm not talking of a 2-party duopoly... > Now we know about safety factors, I think we will prefer a building with a > high safety factor. This is certainly a sales point post 9-11. > > I understand that the twin towers were built to withstand a plane hitting > them. That is, a 707. Now planes are bigger and heavier. > > In a free market, you'll chose your safety factor. I suppose you'll do the > same thing when buying a car. In a "free" market, safety corners are being cut over and over again to save money. I already wrote on the Gotthard tunnel fire which happened because a Belgian company thought it was smart to save a few bucks for a truck driver and safety equipment. A couple of shareholders win, and the public at large loses big time. > You really do have a thing about CEOs. These are people who can run giant > corporations. If it's so good, why don't you become one? Because I reject this way of thinking (and acting). > It's a premium position requiring special talent - so it gets well-paid. > Should it not be well paid? If you look how they're riding our great public services into the ground, although their salaries are much higher than of their public predecessors, I doubt that their talent meets their salary. > A baseball player signed a deal today. Over the next 7 years he'll get $120 > million. He doesn't even have to run a corner store. What an obscene waste of money... Chris
