That’s not true. Only the client side is state owned. Show me examples. If they’re already state owned how can Corbyn be calling for them to be nationalised? Maybe you slept through the Thatcher years, but back then virtually every nationalised industry was outsourced to private companies, the last being the Post Office (which had been state owned since Henry VIII in 16th cent.) a few years back under the Tory/Liberal coalition. Every one has been a disaster in one way or another, the latest fiasco being the east coast train line wherein Virgin and Stagecoach are running up heavy losses and are trying to return it to being state owned for the second time, in that they ran a profitable rail line into losses previously so the govenrment stepped in, ran it for a few years, got it making a profit again, then re-privatised it to the same companies., and now it is running a loss again. Yet Branson still has his space rocket, so he’s doing well out of it, eh.
Not sure about that, they’ve opposed it since it’s creation and the only reason they profess to ‘support’ it publically is because they know it’s a vote winner to say that as the majority of the public support it, yet I suspect that alliegance is only spin deep. They’re always trying to think of ways to introduce privatisation via the back door.
I disagree, profits have nothing to do with good products and services.
Profits come from doing the least amount possible for the maximum profit margin.
For example, in my state Duke Power Co. doesn’t contain and dispose of their coal fly ash in order to maximize their profits. Cleaning up their waste is expensive so they are hesitant to do it. The Dan River got polluted a couple years ago because of their negligence. Common Dreams reported on it.
Capitalism has shown that it is nothing more than a race to the bottom.
How many times have you heard people complain “they don’t make things like they used to”?
Jeremy Corbyn, what a real progressive looks like. Bernie is nothing but a poor mans imitation.
Related: In the Bay Area, Phillips 66 has a huge pile of uncovered petcoke (petroleum coke, a byproduct of refinement). In my research, no local or state agency has the authority to compel the company to cover it.
Only neo-lib dems like yourself would be skeptical.
Of course. Green energy costs more than power from standard plant because it is unreliable and demands extra infrastructure and maintenance, and meanwhile requires the standard full capacity sources as backup. “Green” power is an add on to existing systems if you expect 24/7/365 power, and add on means add on costs. It is not cheaper to have standard plus green, instead of just standard. Meanwhile Australia and Germany are suffering massive price swings because green energy has destabilized the load system and thus pricing. The volatility has led to short periods of ‘negative’ pricing in Germany and huge spikes in price in Australia, but at least both places face brownouts as the additional complexity and peaking failures of a ‘green’ grid occur.
For sure. They know it is political suicide to dismantle heath care. Good thing it actually is political suicide or they would have done it already.
I agree with what you say. Profits have litlle to do good products and services, and everything to do with savvy marketing and “branding”. This was not always the case, but it has been the reality for the entire lifetimes of all who comment here. Because it is all we have ever known, it feels normal. Think 1984. Think Edward Bernays.
Unregulated, irresponsible Corporate Capitalism has no doubt gifted us with many such toxic “time bombs”.
Yep. “Irresponsible” is one thing, “unregulated” quite another. The latter means (obviously) that the institutions we support with our taxes (as if we’ve a choice) are in fact not protecting our literal health.
What works better, public or private? What’s best, capitalism or socialism? A lot depends on leaders. For many, democracy means bomb throwing anarchists.
Can we envision another system today where aided by electronic means, the public can make democratic decisions without movie star dictators?
Cumbersome, hierarchical forms of government need to go. The Swiss shed theirs about 300 years ago without electronic technology. Inspired by their great success, more are following suit:
Well, not sure of your point here, but as must have been apparent to capitalists post WW11, reflationary policies were preferable to, post WW1, deflationary policies…inorder to protect their private capital from revolution. The US Govt. stepped in to help out: peace and business as usual.
Irresponsibility is often the child of deregulation.