There should not be private prisons. There should never be a profit motive for denying someone their freedom. How can there be justice when there is money to be made in finding people guilty?
Even if the prisons themselves are not private, there is money to be made in public prisons. The warden unions, the food services, the construction agencies the states contract with, consumable goods, and most recently prison IT services are all professions and industries that profit hugely off increased incarceration rates and all have varying degrees of lobbying power in state governments across the nation to see more people imprisoned.
Privatization can be compared to micro-transactions in video games. It's a lot more palatable when limited to cosmetic BS, but not so much when everything becomes pay-to-win. They say vote with your wallet, but all that means is that when your wallet is empty you have no voice.
you need more serious anti trust or anti monopoly laws FB or google should not even exist at such a scale or amazon. That's oligarchy not capitalism or free market. Monopoly either by big government or big business is bad too much power corrupts weak souls with vices and selfish reasons. Supreme court should break up amazon or fb or google or microsoft just like it happened with rockefeler's standard oil at the beginning of 20th century in multiple medium sized business like 20 or 30 or more entities.
Emm... yes. Maybe But he is wrong about school choice. You see, there are 2 types of kids. First, hard working, willing to get into college, become succesful entrepreneurs, medics, etc, tc. And second: retatds whore care only about booze, weed, and will end up working minimum wage or on welfare. Bringing them together is a bad idea. Talanted kids will get marginalized by boozers and retatds. School choice provides great opportunity for those who want leaen more-accelerate, and those who don't-stay in public schools. Sorry, intelectual segregation is needed. Now, I don't say that we shouldn't care about boozers-they are still our kids. After all, it is not a cast like in India. But if they want to study in good school with kewl kids... they have to study .
We have regular classes and AP Advanced classes in my public school system. 99% graduate and 93% go to higher ed. I was a drinker and pot smoker and graduated top of my class and have done VERY well in life. So, don't generalize either. It's usually uncaring parents, poor discipline, lowly paid teachers and teachers with their hands tied by the school admin. Many schools in Republican states are grossly underfunded and the entire population suffers.
@@markgigiel2722 Maybe. Sorry, I really generalised. I just wanted to show that there are tohe who care, and those who don't. But... maybe. On other hand, I just brought up my experience- I also new some guys who only cared about booz and nasvar... And also those who were excelent students. In...one public school, mine particulary. So, life is hard. Broken families is a disaster.
I would actually love to see an increase in railroads in America! It's an amazing form of public transportation that has comparatively few emissions and it's a nice way to clear up national road traffic.
Privately owned, for profit "fire companies" used to do all the fire fighting. It was a disaster. When a fire would start several companies could show up at once looking for the job to extinguish the fire and an argument would start over who got the work. Many of these private fire companies were poorly equipped and trained to put out fires. Public fire departments aren't perfect, but they do a job better than private fire companies.
@@edwardmeisse4361 There is a similar scene in the movie, "Gangs of New York". Two fire companies were fighting out side a house that was burning. Meanwhile the house was being looted while it was burning down.
Ancient Rome's first fire department was created by Marcus Licinius Crassus who would send his men to the scene of a fire, then do nothing until Crassus had negotiated a price to put the fire out. Meanwhile his men would steal goods from the burning building, pretending to save them. If Crassus couldn't get a good price to put the fire out, he'd let the building burn to the ground, then buy the land at fire-sale prices. Crassus is the origin of the English word "crass".
@@DavidAdkins78 Always David? Government is always corrupt and incompetent 100% of the time? And private companies are always honest and competent 100% of the time? And there are no private monopolies? Ever?
Prisons should never be privatize, we should not have any "private contractors" in war zones. All military personnel should be directly accountable to the chain of command no matter how non-com their duty is. The children separation was that for security reasons or to make a few private contractors rich?
@@lordunhold5381 in Portland Oregon, at the city hall, there was a protest against ice. I had a sign that said think about attachment disorder. Attachment disorder is not the same as separation anxiety.
DO NOT PRIVATIZE; - Healthcare - Defense - Education - Justice - Infrastructure (Road, Water, Waste) - Telecom Any industry where economies of scale lower cost to deliver the service while your target audience is (choice, geographically, financially) captive, or their mortality is at risk.
Perfect. I would add Energy to your list, as well. Should be a common investment for the good if all. I think we'd be closer to Green than we are if we didn't have corporate interests whining about cost over profits.
Well Jimmy, the problem here is they already are. How's that highest private cost of healthcare, education and price gouging duopoly in Telecom working out so far
Yes, we have toll roads here in SoCal that were built by private companies who “went bankrupt”, forcing the state to bail them out! Just like the US auto industry!
The US auto industry, thankfully for us, paid back the loan bailout, with interest. I'm curious, who has ownership of those toll roads now? Did the state take ownership? Private toll roads don't sound like something that would be in the best interest of tax payers.
Anything that forms a natural monopoly, such as utilities., should be either heavily regulated or owned by the government on behalf of the electorate. In many ways, government ownership is a form of regulation.
utilities can be owned locally by the citizens, too - I think that is even better - home owners or local communities owning solar cell fields and windmills, for example - they pay for it with their taxes and they own it! - benefits go directly to the owners, the people
Corruption borne crony capitalism and lobbying for privitization have gone wrong and can be fixed with "the Government's" (We The People) intervention. For example: Once we have Single Payer/Medicare For All, then those greedy 'for profit' insurance/drug companies will be forced to compete against the actual real cost of healthcare instead of charging their greedy profit oriented monopoly prices. Toooo bad... soooo sad that they'll have to lower their greedy profits while having to provide higher quality care and service to appeal to those who would choose to buy healthcare from them instead of using our Public Option of Medicare For All. I'm sure the greedy Republicans and foolishly ignorant *Trump* *Apologists* will all cry bitter tears for those poooor greedy Billionaire CEO's! Sooooo sad. - Citizens: SPREAD THE WORD! BE SURE AND HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOUR FAMILY, YOUR FRIENDS AND YOUR CO-WORKERS. THE MEDIA IS OWNED, BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, BY CORRUPT BIG PHARMA AND GREEDY INSURANCE COMPANIES. THE MEDIA WON'T ALLOW THIS INFORMATION TO BE BE SHOWN. IT'S UP TO YOU AND ME TO SPREAD THE WORD! Go to Bernie Sanders website. Go to Thom Hartmann's website. Go to PatrioticMillionaires .org. TH-cam Dr Richard Wolff. Inform yourselves! Because if you don't even know what your choices are, then you have No choices. THINKING IS PATRIOTIC!
I work for a municipal water and wastewater services provider. The general consensus in the industry is that private water and wastewater providers generate their (short-term) profits at the expense of reducing maintenance and reducing (or even eliminating!) investment in longer term capital projects. Therefore, keep essential community services such as water and wastewater under the control and ownership of the community, i.e. the city, the county.
Yep. They tripled our rates when they came to town. The water became undrinkable for weeks at a time. The only visible thing I have seen them do is install new meters that do not require manual reading. They may have done things in the water treatment area that can't be seen. But they certainly never replaced all the mains like they claimed they would before coming to town.
Barton have you seen the story of the city in Georgia that voted to become an independent municipal and outsourced all public services except police and firefighters? Their a example of privatization done right.
Number 6: Don't privatize when the service/infrastructure has been paid for by public funds (e.g. tax dollars, publicly funded loans, etc.). Too often, state governments are selling/leasing/contracting public infrastructure (e.g. roads) to private firms who get paid for little to nothing more than what the government was already providing, and usually at a lower cost. The reason for this is usually "revenue sharing". For example, with toll roads, the private company charges a toll and, in exchange, is supposed to maintain those roads and share some of the revenue with the local government. This ends up only being tax shifting. It "covers" politicians by allowing them to complain that they have cut taxes/reduced government spending, while shifting the actual costs (plus a NEW profit margin for the company) to tolls (a new name for a tax levied by a private company), which are typically paid by those who benefit less from the roads themselves (i.e. workers/consumers, rather than businesses). And the private companies can either give up their contract or "go bankrupt" when high costs come up. After all, according to Pres. Trump, doing so after sucking all the money out of the company, "is smart business"... leaving the taxpayer holding the bill, again. Businesses have become particularly good at "privatizing the profits and socializing the losses". Just to be clear, the idea that PRIVATIZATION is "lower cost" is a myth. Government services do not have a profit motive. While there may be some waste (due to incompetence/corruption), there is only ONE way for a private company to provide a service for less. By reducing its costs. How do you "reduce costs"? Here are a few ways: 1. Employ fewer people. And, usually, by doing this, it means by providing a lower level of service. 2. Pay the people you employ less. Again, this has consequences. These consequences include, but are not limited to: Lower skilled employees, reduced spending in the community (by those employed), worse services, fewer benefits for those employed, etc. 3. Cutting the level/number of services. We end up getting less per dollar. There are things that business provide well. However, public services are not those things. They are called PUBLIC SERVICES because SOCIETY (i.e. we, the people), as a whole, benefits from them. All government is not bad and all business is not good. We need to keep that in mind. There are things in life that we need to keep in mind are not negotiable. Staying alive, for one. Most ambulance services are now privatized. When you need an ambulance to go to the hospital because you believe you (or a loved one) is in dire need of medical attention, do you ask for what the ride will cost? No. You call 911 and get the transport. Even in a local market, the difference in cost (that you pay for) for an ambulance ride can be tremendous. Anyway, my $.02...
Here they love to privitise roads with high tolls. Unfortunately the government shuts down roads to make a bottleneck forcing people to use them. When people still refused to use them. The government bailed them out, gave them tax cuts and paid for enhancements to their roads. Essentially we paid three times (through our taxes) so that we could drive on roads that were once free and they also get tax cuts. Most of our privatized roads are owned by one major investment group.
Andrew Lim Lmao so yeah the government should nationalize it and run it to the ground like they run everything to the ground . Healthcare under the government like you picture it in your socialist wet dreams will be a nightmare just like veteran affairs is a nightmare .
@@based_leopard4061 Nice spam you're posting on every comment regardless of how relevant it is. I hope you're at least getting paid by TPUSA and not just peddling this "privatize everything" nonsense so that some crony capitalist can get richer.
@@based_leopard4061 It's very well possible that the USA federal government isn't capable enough to run health care. But that's a failing of the USA federal government, not governmental health care in general. Most developed nations have governmental health care, and it works better than USA health care.
@@rutger5000 Who told you that? What metric outcomes have you seen that qualify your assertion of "better"? By what standards are your comparisons made? Legitimately asking.
@@WhoThrewThat I'm not an expert in the field. But the quality of health care can be expressed by a few metrics. Costs, impact on life expectancy, rate of complications and patient satisfaction can all be quantified reasonably well. And the USA doesn't do terribly well when compared to other nations. Costs especially running very high. "Google scholar" is your friend in getting more sources on this.
I worked in private prisons for three years (two different facilities) as a training manager, training correctional officers. The experience convinced me that running prisons should be an inherently public matter. This was for two reasons. First, the corporation (the largest in the industry, then and now) looked to cut corners (expenses) wherever possible. If the customer (local, state, or federal government) didn't anticipate something in the contract, they didn't get it. Second, the inmate's status (minimum security, medium security, etc.) was often affected by his/her disciplinary record. This, in turn, affected their release dates. (Minimum security inmates earn more time off for good behavior. Changing an inmate's status from minimum to medium could add months to their incarceration.) But who determined disciplinary infractions? The private company running the prison. I'm not saying the company encouraged punishing inmates and keeping them incarcerated longer. Far from it; the hassles of running the prison were much too great to be dabbling like that. But it gave the APPEARANCE it could happen, which is horrible. Private prisons, by the way, exist not to incarcerate inmates--although the companies do run prisons. No. Instead, they exist to FINANCE AND BUILD prisons. See, getting a bond passed to pay for the construction of a new prison is difficult politically. But signing a contract with a private prison company to build and operate the prison--stretched out over a 20-year period--is much easier. Simply put, private prison companies are not in the business of RUNNING prisons. They're in the business of BUILDING prisons. That's why the one I worked at transformed itself into a REIT. Personally, I don't think privatization adds value to education, incarceration, or health care.
I agree, privately run for-profit prisons probably at best serve to diminish the credibility of our criminal justice system. Hey, why are states so cash strapped that they think they need to do this? Why are states so short on dough that they sell mug shots to private companies who then publish them on the internet? Mug shots which include those of people subsequently found not guilty and which may not be possible to remove entirely from the web?
Prisons and hospitals are a neccecary evil and neccecary evils should never be privitized. Because it's in the direct interest of the bussinesses to make sure they don't work.
I've been wondering about that for many years. It seems like from the stories about food, there seems to be a problem in food preparation and refrigeration. Can you address that? And why are people in the 'public charge' not adequately provided for? Is is 'private company profit margin'?
@@seannolan9857 pretty much, plus housing, medical and energy for residential. although, I'd add in things like prisons and systems that make a country run, like national transport (because people being able to get to and from work easily and conveniently would build a stronger economy)
perhaps instead of necessities use the world essentials, but avoid the reductionist who will say we only need food,water,air. Police forces are essential for a modern society etc.
@@seannolan9857 food, water air, healthcare, education, transit, infrastructure, housing (in the sense of making profit not off of rent but off of speculating with the housing, gentrifying cities and driving out anyone who isn't well off etc. Since scarcity in housing = more money to be made) edit: and yes, police/fire services would also be counted among that
@@nonegiven2830 you're forgetting some very critical things that human life depends upon & which can result in the actual death of individuals when controlled by other entities motivated by shareholder quarterly profit. Sean is trying to box you in to agreeing with his statement without thoroughly reviewing it. Like education, for example.
Every time a reich-wing idiot says "VENEZUELA!", drink a shot. If, according to reich-winger in question, communism has killed over 100 million -> take a 10cl shot, 200 million -> 20cl shot, and so on and so on *sniff* Add rules if you feel you aren't getting drunk fast enough. P.S. Have Soviet Union's national anthem on repeat when playing this game.
Yes. This, exactly. You took the words out of my mouth. I live in San Diego, one of the first counties to de regulate electricity and suffer Enron's bullshit. That very first summer it happened, energy bills went through the roof and the county had rolling blackouts, I can remember being in school when the power went out. Everyone swore up and down de regulation would increase competition and innovation, which would lower costs. The exact opposite happened, costs doubled and quality of services decreased. There's just some shit where the incentives for private enterprise don't line up with keeping customer prices low.
845835ab, You mean the fraud that was forced into the light by the fact that the Bush Administration wasn’t giving them special consideration like the Clinton Administration?
I remember a case where two detainees in a privately run jail where handed over to foreign authorities for extradition without an extradition hearing, i.e. due process. That's just one example of many why incarceration should not be run with the same management model as a fast food franchise.
The US had public money with the greenbacks en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenback_(1860s_money) . But then privatized it via corporate banks. In the old countries we were stupid a whole lot earlier. The UK even pressured the US to make money making a free private activity.
Even in small countries like the Dominican Republic, the best insurance provider is run by the State. There are plenty of private insurance companies and none of them gives you anything close to what you get on the public one for less.
And a doctor makes less than 20k in the DR. Why would ANYONE want to go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, 3-7 years of residency, sit for their boards only to make 20k ?
@@youtubesucks1499 the average doctor is making 5 or 6 times the minimum wage. I have a relative making a specializatio in medicine in NY that is going to work here in the Dominican Republic. One of my uncles is a gynecologist that lived in the USA for 2 decades and currently lives and work here too.
I want to wipe private "for profit" insurance off the face of the earth. The bigger the pool you have, the more efficiently the insurance system can work. All health, auto, and home insurance should be run by the government.
+Jess. I dont think that would work well. Insurance needs to be private in order to have "offers" that differ and are interesting to industries or similar. The government in this regards should regulate so one doesnt get "junk" insurance that isnt worth anything in practice. There are just so many different types of insurance out there that its unpractical for the government to run it. Heck, the government doesnt even insure anything because the combined cost would cost more than replacing whatever got lost. Be it a B1 bomber costing a billion dollars or a trash can costing one. While socialized healthcare is compared to insurance. It doesnt really work like that. Its just similar in an analogical manner. Which is why nations like Norway, which has socialized healthcare, allow some private as well to compensate for those areas the government has more demand than supply. These few private clinics only serve those that are insured. Mostly being employers that want their employee back sooner rather than later, but the flip side is that if the employer takes the cost via the company insurance. The company pays for the operation and both the cost and spot in the socialized system isnt affected. Allowing someone that doesnt have access to insurance to go since the "employee" before him got the private version. Obviously, you need a strict balance here to avoid "all" the good doctors going private and so on, but that is were regulation comes in and you limit the amount of private clinics there can be and what they can do. Another example could be plastic surgery. Everything aimed towards beauty is private. While those that need it more in regards to "looking normal" after an accident or similar. Get it via the government for free.
@@Lobos222 it seems like what you're describing is public-private competition. If we were to apply this to a Medicare for all scenario, it might work like this. You are automatically enrolled in payroll deductions for medicare just like social security and other taxes. However, you can choose to opt out by providing a policy code that you'd get by buying a plan through a private insurance company. This allows both the public and private options to both remain available. It would help drive down private insurance costs because these companies would have to compete directly with the public option. Major health networks would all be required to accept medicare. But a doctor operating in his own private practice would have the option to accept or not. As mentioned above , non reconstructive plastic surgery would only be covered by a private insurance policy. How does that idea sound?
@@linkplayer20 Its not "public-private competition" because the government dictates what the private sector can do. So the government would be like. We need more "knee operation" than we can handle. We now, for some time as we see fit, allow private sector to do some of them... So its wrong to view it like they are competing. The private sector is here just supplementing socialized healthcare in a manner that benefits society without starting to game the system for private interests. What you are describing is something that wouldnt lover private insurance because the best hospitals, with the competent doctors, would lean more and more towards the private sector, because the wages will be better in order to game the system long term, until that aspect went critical mass and people would view the public option as bad in comparison. The very reason the private sectors cant do what they want in regards to healthcare where I live.
@@Lobos222 not quite. A private practice would be defined as a single doctor working out of their own place of business. A hospital or health networks would not fall under this. So even if all the best doctors were to jump ship from hospitals, they would just be further dividing market share between more people. Also, it would still drive down private insurance costs because no one would go for the private option that offers less value for more cost. So private insurers would either have to increase the value of the product to exceed the value of the public option ( perhaps by covering cosmetic services that the public option won't) to justify the higher cost, or reduce the cost to remain directly competitive with the public option. As a side, we already dictate would private hospitals can do, so that whole part of your argument goes out the window
Rather than having municipal or private ownership of energy, water, education and health infrastructure, we should set up perpetual Co-Operatives that are owned by communities.
And full requisition of property & assets of people who inevitably steal from them. Also xcellent audits, oversight. The eagle beagles hover overhead ready and waiting to swoop when or if Co-op meets their end. Cos of poor management.?plus
Remember I live in Michigan I don’t care people know that and they pass laws here that say we can’t create our own power we can’t put solar on our roofs we can’t put generators in our yard and we can’t bring up our own water because it’s all private sized it’s ridiculous and when you try they get upset now they also have a big problem with people doing their own work on their own house oh my god they flipped right out because they need to have people involved that need to make money I guess I told him to get bent is my property and ain’t your decision don’t tell your neighbor what to do it ain’t none of your business
Excellent lesson. I wish we started studying all this in elementary school. Understanding this sort of thing is priceless when it comes to surviving and making good decisions in a hugely complex society.
That is an absolutely moronic statement. There are certain things that should be privatized, and some that shouldn’t be. You can’t just say they should “never be privatized”. There are different solutions for different services.
@@libertybiberty8182 Agreed. Ultimately, why not allow people to vote on the matter of which services are privatised? Seems like a fair solution to me. Each to their own i guess.
@@nolanpierce4116 can't hear your argument while you gargle that boot lol wall St crashes every decade and is incredibly inefficient and costly. Our most efficient systems are welfare ones. Facts don't care about your feelings.
you're very right because: - public schools are known to produce great students - the postal service turns a massive profit every year - private military totally doesn't have the incentive to keep things as cheap and efficent (which ultimately benefits shareholders and the public) as possible
Noting that a combination of humans, and the public good ought never be privatized? These are key to our being a democracy rather than a corporation. As, per my norm, thank you, Robert and crew. My former neighbors Ken and Kitty Galbraith are applauding from somewhere.
Robert Reich is ALWAYS right! And so easy to understand! Do NOT privatise anything that is for the betterment of the people, i am NOT including share-holders here, who are usually the only ones who benefit from privatisation!!
Stores are the only thing that should be private. Transportation, energy, judicial and prison system should never be privatized. Also things that affect people's lives like healthcare and education.
I think every reason you make about not privatizing something is a reason to socialize something else. You say we should not privatize education because its purpose is to being us together. By the same token, I say we should socialize the internet. My home town has a municipal ISP called SELCO and it repairs quickly while being cheaper than everything else nearby, on top of being subject to the first amendment as a government operation.
Holobrine Lmao so yeah the government should nationalize it and run it to the ground like they run everything to the ground . Healthcare under the government like you picture it in your socialist wet dreams will be a nightmare just like veteran affairs is a nightmare .
L 3/5 I said socialize, not nationalize. It works just fine at the local government level. I know from personal experience, that’s now my home town does it.
@@based_leopard4061 The VA is so problematic because it draws out of the same funding pool as the active military and defense department. It has to compete for funds with current operations and with bloated defense contracts like the gawdawful 1.5 trillion dollar F35. As a consequence the VA is criminally underfunded and we all ought to be royally pissed about it. Single payer would be more like insurance, only we all get the same insurer. Instead of premiums, we'd pay taxes. We'd still go to private clinics and hospitals, not a public health system like the VA. And yeah, the VA needs a boot up the ass.
w b, thank you for posting factual information in response to rhetoric. Some minds may not necessarily be change because subjective facts are a thing these days, but some of us appreciate the opportunity to learn.
Privitization is taking a publicly owned asset and giving it to a private entity who will take over and charge us for running the operation. Now we have no say in how the asset is administered, no ability to control price hikes or the characters of the Board of Directors. It's a giveaway from the middle class to the 1%. We don't have socialism here but it is a more cooperative society where people pay a little more in taxes and, in turn, get a higher standard of iving, free college, free daycare and other valuable benefits. Right now, Betsy Devos and the Republicans are trying to starve public education so they can bolster for-profit charter schools. Most peple done know or care what's going on.
Once again, spot on Mr. Reich. Your intuitive, and common sense approach to this, and many other issues make you a perfect fit to lead one of the top posts in the next administration.
I would like to see more privatized power companies. E.g. more power options, like solar, hydro, nuclear, wind, or whatever it takes to keep these folks honest with competitive prices. Sometimes I look at my bill and feel like I'm getting shived.
Simple way to do this is to make all electrical and gas for homes a nonprofit situation they cannot make any profit on it all they can do is put money away to fix pipes and wires and pay their employees and then make cost the cost of what that cost is to get that to the Home you Gotta stop greed when it comes to safety in life you got a quit passing laws that says it’s illegal for somebody to take care of their family simple that’s what they do if you live in the city you can’t become your own power station because they passed a law that says it’s illegal for you that’s wrong this is America you don’t have the right to tell anybody on their property how to live I truly believe that down in my soul quit telling your neighbor what to do worry about you I wanna build something on my property the powers to be will tell me I can’t because the banks and mortgage companies have spent a lot of money to figure out how to make properties worth more money which is wrong ain’t none of your business what I do on my own property please let’s ban together and get rid of this this is America you don’t have the right to tell me . And you shouldn’t have the right to restrain me for making my own power or heat simple
It astounds me that the pro-privatization GOP doesn't understand this simple distinction. It makes me feel that they do and are nefarious in their intent to give public contracts to private entities in order to gain political favor (power) with all that entails.
The pro-privatization GOP understands exactly what privatization means. Their intent is to allow corporations (including themselves and their cronies and donors) to profit from anything they can get their hands on regardless of the consequences to the public. Republicans care about their own bank accounts and the power money gives them. These GOP "free market" and privatization proponents LOVE corporate welfare (tax breaks, subsidies, etc.), but demonize public welfare. They want it all for themselves and try to distract and divert your attention by selling you the snake oil of trickle-down economics. Why do you think Republicans love all the Republican tax cuts, from Reagan to Bush to Trump, that they have never paid for, but then they stand firmly against public policies like Medicare for All saying "how are you going to pay for it?" (By the way Medicare for All will be cheaper than our current system. It cuts out the greedy health insurance profiteers, doesn't require huge marketing expenditures, and Medicare's current administrative costs are far lower than those of private insurers.)
The most efficient transport system (Japan's rail system) is privately owned and operated. Perhaps that says something different about privatization than this video states.
@@lmy2366 but I bet Japanese privatization is completely different from American privatization. I bet the Japanese government heavily regulated this privatization to benefit them. If you allow someone to just do whatever they want they’ll look for the shittiest and most cruel way of getting more money.
Reagan was the spokesman for years for GE before entering politics. He was thoroughly indoctrinated by the management there, that hated being restrained in any way. Reagan embraced Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand, two of the most successful corporate suck-ups and shills of the past century. The pendulum is swinging away from their extreme insanity. They wanted to unshackle capitalism and instead they have taken us a long way back down the road towards fuedalism.
Even saying private companies are good for their shareholders is somewhat optimistic. There's more than one example of where the interests of the executives who make the decisions were favored over those of the shareholders.
I'm for Co-Ops, profit-sharing among employees (labor and management alike) and making shareholding illegal. It is absolutely insane that someone can just sit on their butt and rake in millions without having lifted a finger toward the production of that commodity or service from which they accumulate their wealth. Our system is built upon the Dutch-British Charter system. It is built upon greed and the thirst for blood.
So what happens when a company needs outside financing and it is already extremely levered? The LLC joint stock corporation is one of the greatest inventions man ever made, enabling corporations to finance projects spanning entire continents like pipelines, and you want to end as much?
@@lmy2366 Most people who want to start a co-op and are against stock holders have zero idea how to start and fund a business. They will never risk their life savings to start a business.
As someone in Canada where we have contacted out certain parts of healthcare and education delivery, ie., Cleaning and transportation it has neither reduced costs nor improved the delivery. There are a few more millionaires running around telling us it is a wonderful thing but they are less convincing everyday.
Most of the student defaults are from students that went to for profit colleges. SOLUTION: Do not have the government back ANY student load to a for-profit college. Allow the student to take bankruptcy if they cannot pay the load back and the college was a for-profit school! Another word for for-profit colleges - SCAM.
The solution is that going 90 days without sufficiently paying back a debt should be punishable by death. If the consequences are severe enough, you'll see far fewer people using money they don't have for an education that people of their class could never benefit from.
How about if you’re going to privatize something, you need to also privatize cost and risk. I’m also getting sick of privatizing access to public information like weather data, tax computations, navigational and geographical data, basic research grants. If we funded it, you don’t get to own it or charge us to see/use it.
Agree. It's fun and all while things are booming but when the stuff hits the fan then somehow the many must bail out the few. Like i say for insurance companies, they should be capable to pay all of their policies at once if needed, as in never to have more clients than they can sustain. If something seems not good for business then don't make that business. Money should not just make more money by default, everything must grow each year. Cover expenses and that's that, keep the activity moving on, you don't need profits to provide services indefinitely. I mean, it's impossible to have profits indefinitely, nothing is infinite. Find the balance to keep things going in order to provide a value to society and maintain that on a steady flat line.
Well done Mr. Reich! This message needs to desperately get out to the American people, the public 😊, post haste! And thank you too!! Keep up the great work!!!
I retired from my local government as an electrician with facilities management. The county privatized utilities, vehicle maintenance and wanted to privatize our department. Our department head had to turn in a bid just like the outside companies. Long story short when representative for the county went to check on the low bidders work they found it below the standards we were doing in house. Than the cost over runs in both utilities and vehicle maintenance caused them to be brought back in house at the end of their contracts. These companies promise slot for what seems like little money but you need to look at what they leave out of those bids. When an emergency repair or replacement is needed you find out that's not covered under the contract and you end up paying twice what it should cost to do the work.
As a European: dont privatize energy, electricity, gas, water, railroads, public transport. All basic needs should remain under public influence. Whatever the cost may be,. Because it isnt a market. Water is just water and heat heat, etc. It only allows in-between layers of overhead and enriching nonsense. Though changing mgtmt in senior rangs every 5 year would be a good thing
Another way to put #5: Consumer choice must always be possible. One of the worst ideas in this bracket is water privatisation. Every person should have the right to cheap and safe tap water where such a thing is feasible. Here in Germany, some madmen were actually considering this while the US shows clearly how much of a shitshow water privatisation can become. Flint is far from an isolated case and from what I've heard, water tastes of chlorine (among other things) pretty much year-round in places. It's a simple "business" where you can't do much different from the competition and you usually can't choose. Whoever thought you could privatise that was utterly nuts.
All utilities such as electricity ,Gas,Water, Public Transport, Roads, Highway Maintainence,Health Service,Police Service,Fire Service,Ambulance Service,School and College Education, Libraries, Public toilets, Recreational Parks and Open Spaces and play areas for children should be Publically owned and funded to serve the common good of all.
He has and he take his message everywhere. Not to many people listened to him. He's been speaking out precisely on this topic since he was Secretary of Labor.
i like that Reich defined a filter to what best fits public vs private ownership. Then we can discuss whether those "rules" are valid and then see if they fit what is and what should be publicly owned. Aside--- It's interesting that folks will buy stock in a company and become a part owner and accept dividends, yet then turn around and demand that there shouldn't be public ownership of utilities and roads. As if the govt isn't like a corporation with a CEO/president, directors, managers, supervisors, employees, suppliers, and policies, operational and maintenance procedures and processes, revenue and expenses, a charter, and shareholder participation. Citizens are the shareholders of the Fed, state, and city govts. The Constitution and charters are articles of incorporation. Seems simple, at least to me.
So well said, Dr. Reich. We need you, thank you very much. As a background thought, there is no positive future for anybody if the needs of our social fabric are steadily ignored, in the name of short-term quick profiting . Everything is not about what we earn or deserve as individuals; the word community exists for a reason, and no I am not a communist. I simply believe that civility and safety are better off in a world that truly takes into consideration the needs of those who actually are in need, .... really, not just for marketing. Exhausting, he? (I must be canadian, I wrote he) Thanks again Dr. Reich, common sense is precious, however not as common as we wish.
Yeah, I'm like... what is gonna happen for these people once they've ground the rest of humanity into the dirt? Are their lives going to be better, or even much different? I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but following this line of thought makes me wonder if people really are colonizing Mars. What is there to gain from sucking everything dry...?
"~-::Spaceforce::-~" ((rolls eyes)) Only this administration could make literally the entire solar system sound rape-y. Who's gonna build something like that?? Not the losers making constant power-grabs; their doughy hands don't know what work feels like.
Clearly Healthcare and education should be public. The trend toward private prisons should be reversed. I’m beginning to think too now that energy should also have a public run company much as there is another countries. This is more complicated and there are plenty of good and bad Examples, but Norway is a good model. Further you can drive renewable energy sources better than commercial companies who have resisted this and do away with subsidies all together at the same time. Private security forces military theaters of operation need to be gone. They are nothin more than mercenaries with too much power, little oversight and attract too many that don’t care about communities they operate. They’re as bad or worse than private prisons.
Public energy in Russia: you can't get electricity when you want. You have to queue for permits. Some dude who controls the permitting process is filthy rich by virtue of being at the right place at the right time. Meanwhile the entrepreneur is at his Mercy. You can't sell excess energy off your solar or wind. And guess what, albeit being public, the gov, and Putin in particular still rents out the system to their cronies. To 3 ppl. Yes three people control the entire grid of Russia. All the stations, all the grid. And they won't allow competition.
If a member of Congress doesn't support Medicare for All, vote that person out. I don't care what party they belong to. I don't care what their other policies support. They don't put the health of Americans first, so they need to go.
Public education is a sad example of a well-intended but mostly failed government program. I have several grandchildren who were homeschooled and the better for it. I have (2) two nieces that quit their public school teaching jobs appalled by the system and mayhem in the classroom. As a contractor, I did several projects for both York and Harrisburg City School districts. With one (1) exception what I saw was pitiful. Reich is either willfully ignorant or has an agenda. Lastly, about 50% of college freshmen take both remedial math and English classes and we rank poorly when compared to other modern countries.
I grew up in Helsinki, Finland and now I find myself in Manhattan Beach, California. I find apparent big public / private differences on the municipal level. Helsinki buses are operated by private companies, here it is public. Here I often see city work vehicles with people standing around, some doing some work, In Helsinki I remember private contractors doing those things. I do agree with the five areas that you mentioned. Basically private enterprise works for the consumer if there is competition for price and quality and there is enough choice. We still need rules to take into account harmful effects, such as no longer bringing us together.
Hi from New Zealand, The 5 rules of thumb for when public services should not be privatized was interesting. NZ privatized prisons to an Australian contractor and had to turn them back to state owned, because the inmates started fight clubs within the prison system. Someone muggled a smart phone into the prison and started to film them live. NZ also privatized intellectually handicap hospitals and completely deinstitutionalized psychiatric hospitals. While it does have some merit, not totally sure it was the right move? Once again, thank you for the education, and sharing your wealth of knowledge with the world.
I like that he doesn't just bash privatisation in general, but explains the core principles and exactly when they are a problem. Gives his arguments so much more weight!
Robert your videos are so well done and educationally informative that I wish all Americans were watching and shared in schools.You and Richard Wolff are excellent teaches. Your a patriot in my book. Why didn't you run for President.?
The only time you shouldnt privatize is when there isnt going to be enough competition to keep prices low. Competitve markets benefit consumers every time.
6) Don't privatise anything that could be considered 'Critical National Infrastructure'. The ability of any service to be so requisite to day to day and other businesses life that to remove it (or simply the threat of its removal) would cause severe harm to sections of the community is a destructive one that should not be in the hands of private interests. Particularly when those interests may have no stake in the communities or businesses they are affecting, other than to make a gain at their expense. Supplemental infrastructure can be private, but the basic ability to access resources that all basic aspects of modern living a reliant upon must be available to all if a society is to be able to truly call itself civilised.
This all assumes that private companies are unregulated, which is the reality today. With proper regulation some of the reasons given in this video would not apply. We have to kill private companies' ability to control government. We need to vote for politicians who won't take PAC money or money from corporations.
I had a friend that worked for a private social service agency and their goal was to keep clients on the need because they got paid by the number of clients they had so they certainly didn't want the people they were helping to get off.
I wish Libertarians would listen to this. I know far too many libertarians who think that unregulated privatized EVERYTHING would be superior to anything government. I guess they're mostly asleep to all the abuses that go on every hour of every day in the private sector.
All vital and natural resources should be owned by the state. Every large corporation with large profits should be collectively owned. All medium sized business should be worker owned. Only small businesses and human capital should be privatized! There should be limits to income inequality, end winner take all salaries, maximum salaries should be imposed, and there should be policies for a more equal income distribution. Economic democracy and state regulation should have direct control over the profit and income distribution. Financial incentives can be used to structure economic behavior to meet socialist goals. Finance, healthcare, education, housing, and nonprofit trust funds should be state owned or collectively owned. Privatization is not "done right or wrong," its all about ideology. If you are a left liberal like Reich then you believe individuals should own most of the capital and only a few things should be publicly owned. If you are a socialist most of the capital should be collectively owned while only a few things should be individually owned. Reich does not mind extreme inequality as long as some money gets redistributed to the poor. Socialists believe that inequality rips apart a collectivist society. Therefore they believe in a lot more equality than liberals do. Liberals should be brutally murdered and disposed of into the nearest trash dumpster. People die under liberalism
I totally agree. In Germany we also had a wave of privatisation, but not as hard as in the US. E.g. I find it good that we privatized our air-company, because before the privatization flying was incredible expensive while today it's way cheaper. But I'm glad we didn't privatized much of health care or universities, so that both of them are free. I'm also not a fan to renationalize everything cause sometimes it's just the lack of money rather than the lack of public control. And when I remember that in East Germany people had to wait at least 15 years for their cars, you can see that some things are better done by companies than by the state.
Maybe no business should be totally privatize. Would prefer that government regulates profits like some of the European nation so to not create oligarchs that swing government control to private control.
All necessities should not be privatised: food, water, electricity, living, roads, healthcare etc. only luxury stuff should depend on private market because those can't exploit depedancies
For the school buses it means desperate school districts sell their fleets for short term profit and then got screwed when the private company jacked up their rates.
Not just that the privatized companies don't care if the buses get fixed or the employees get a good fair wage, they only care about profits, and since when should there be profits in taking children to school!
I remember the 80s and how Lobbyists from the USA pressured german politicians to put forward privatizations of our institutions and public goods. Nowadays we struggle with the results. One of the reasons why the UK is leaving the EU is that the EU has regulations which do not allow nationalize again once privatized industries as that would go against investors of capital and we can't have that or can we now.
In the past, companies had a public service element to them. Which is why a sovereign people would grant such powers and immunities to corporations. Now, they claim that their only obligation is to shareholder value. Why should we privatize if they are declaring, in the very beginning, that share value is their only goal?
I still don't understand why we continue to use the euphemistic term "privatization", when a better and more accurate term would be "PROFITIZATION". Because that's the main difference. PROFIT for the "private" corporations taking over these services.
But that profit is an incentive to keep costs low, and their reputation is in the line. Both don’t happen in the public sector, se we get cases where the government will pay $2 million to build a small public toilet... where a private company would pay $200k
"Defense contractors" are more aptly named "Offense contractors". When was the last time the US was attacked by a foreign nation and had to defend US soil? Pearl Harbor? I may be missing some more recent cases, but most US military action since then has been offensive.
I believe that having a public option for consumers for every single product or service, would allow us to see clearly what industries are benefited by privatization and what industries better serve the public by being public. Consumers would always have a choice on which items or services to buy, services that compete well with quality and price that could use the profits to fund public programs could take the tax burden off of citizens. If done well it could end the need to debate over tax rates vs public programs to lift up people in poverty. Socially responsible citizens could choose daily to contribute to the good of their fellow citizens while contrarians could choose to not to purchase government goods, but may decide to because of better price, higher quality, better treatment of workers, or the products being more eco friendly.
@@dannmarceau but not like the good old days. Now BIG PHARMA steps in & synthesize what used to be plant based medicines. Big pharma & greed have snatched up the inventions for their bottom dollar. Everything is about money. If it wasn't the engine that got 100+ mpg would be in every vehicle.
My belief -- Government should provide those services that private business either: a) can't provide; b) won't provide; and c) can be trusted to provide.
things that should be privately owned: your house your car anything that is personal property, that you do not use to extract value from somebody else's labor (e.g. a factory is NOT personal property) things that should be publicly owned: all of the means of production (factories, refineries, manufacturing, everything we consider "industry") all of the means to repair/maintain all publicly owned machinery/infrastructure transport (trains, planes, buses) natural resources utilities (water, electricity) agriculture schools research labs large dwelling houses like apartments and condominiums
Privatization of any service that can be performed by the Gov't at lower cost, should not be allowed. Many unions have a stipulation that a cost study be done before ANY services can be contracted. Many Gov't agencies retain anti union law firms that push for contracting and managers that comply with no knowledge of how it affects their employees, budgets or themselves. Rarely does a contractor perform the job as cost effectively or to the same level of quality. They do everything they can to render as much profit and expend the least amount of manpower/resources while doing it. This is NOT a better choice for our country or our citizens. It's only a benefit for corporations and their shareholders. Meaning more of our tax dollars are spent for less service, higher cost and bigger profits for the already wealthy! All privatization should be required to go through the above mentioned cost analysis. That way, most wouldn't exist!
There should not be private prisons. There should never be a profit motive for denying someone their freedom. How can there be justice when there is money to be made in finding people guilty?
Especially when the companies that run those prisons then lobby for laws that will increase the prison population.
Even if the prisons themselves are not private, there is money to be made in public prisons. The warden unions, the food services, the construction agencies the states contract with, consumable goods, and most recently prison IT services are all professions and industries that profit hugely off increased incarceration rates and all have varying degrees of lobbying power in state governments across the nation to see more people imprisoned.
ARE YOU LOBBY AGAINST LOBBYING THEN?
This, and they also will have no interest in rehabilitation of prisoners. After all, why deny yourself returning customers?
I'm a retired cop, you can't incarcerate for profit, this is a burden society must accept. Totally agree with you this is our responsibility.
Privatization can be compared to micro-transactions in video games. It's a lot more palatable when limited to cosmetic BS, but not so much when everything becomes pay-to-win. They say vote with your wallet, but all that means is that when your wallet is empty you have no voice.
And too often you are out voted by the very rich, large corporations and global enterprises who don't have to obey the law. No voice.
you only get what the fattest wallets want.
That's a very good analogy, and I'm likely to use it in the future.
you need more serious anti trust or anti monopoly laws
FB or google should not even exist at such a scale or amazon.
That's oligarchy not capitalism or free market.
Monopoly either by big government or big business is bad too much power corrupts weak souls with vices and selfish reasons.
Supreme court should break up amazon or fb or google or microsoft just like it happened with rockefeler's standard oil at the beginning of 20th century in multiple medium sized business like 20 or 30 or more entities.
@@opreadumitru1 I agree our monopoly and antitrust laws are pretty vague at the least and not used near enough.
Privatization wrecked the British railroad system.
And now the healthcare system
Emm... yes. Maybe
But he is wrong about school choice. You see, there are 2 types of kids. First, hard working, willing to get into college, become succesful entrepreneurs, medics, etc, tc. And second: retatds whore care only about booze, weed, and will end up working minimum wage or on welfare. Bringing them together is a bad idea. Talanted kids will get marginalized by boozers and retatds. School choice provides great opportunity for those who want leaen more-accelerate, and those who don't-stay in public schools. Sorry, intelectual segregation is needed. Now, I don't say that we shouldn't care about boozers-they are still our kids. After all, it is not a cast like in India. But if they want to study in good school with kewl kids... they have to study .
We have regular classes and AP Advanced classes in my public school system. 99% graduate and 93% go to higher ed. I was a drinker and pot smoker and graduated top of my class and have done VERY well in life. So, don't generalize either. It's usually uncaring parents, poor discipline, lowly paid teachers and teachers with their hands tied by the school admin. Many schools in Republican states are grossly underfunded and the entire population suffers.
@@markgigiel2722 Maybe. Sorry, I really generalised. I just wanted to show that there are tohe who care, and those who don't. But... maybe. On other hand, I just brought up my experience- I also new some guys who only cared about booz and nasvar... And also those who were excelent students. In...one public school, mine particulary. So, life is hard. Broken families is a disaster.
I would actually love to see an increase in railroads in America! It's an amazing form of public transportation that has comparatively few emissions and it's a nice way to clear up national road traffic.
Privately owned, for profit "fire companies" used to do all the fire fighting. It was a disaster. When a fire would start several companies could show up at once looking for the job to extinguish the fire and an argument would start over who got the work. Many of these private fire companies were poorly equipped and trained to put out fires. Public fire departments aren't perfect, but they do a job better than private fire companies.
@@edwardmeisse4361 There is a similar scene in the movie, "Gangs of New York". Two fire companies were fighting out side a house that was burning. Meanwhile the house was being looted while it was burning down.
Ancient Rome's first fire department was created by Marcus Licinius Crassus who would send his men to the scene of a fire, then do nothing until Crassus had negotiated a price to put the fire out. Meanwhile his men would steal goods from the burning building, pretending to save them. If Crassus couldn't get a good price to put the fire out, he'd let the building burn to the ground, then buy the land at fire-sale prices. Crassus is the origin of the English word "crass".
In the private sector we have infinite choices.
Government is always a corrupt, incompetent, monopoly.
@@DavidAdkins78 Always David? Government is always corrupt and incompetent 100% of the time? And private companies are always honest and competent 100% of the time? And there are no private monopolies? Ever?
@@DaveGIS123 Very interesting Dave. Thanks!
Prisons should never be privatize, we should not have any "private contractors" in war zones. All military personnel should be directly accountable to the chain of command no matter how non-com their duty is.
The children separation was that for security reasons or to make a few private contractors rich?
No the seperation of the childrin is a security issue (the main problem is sexual abuse)
The seperation must not be don by privat contractors
Freemarket-Capitalism is based on pillars and one of them is the choise to change the partner
@@lordunhold5381 in Portland Oregon, at the city hall, there was a protest against ice. I had a sign that said think about attachment disorder. Attachment disorder is not the same as separation anxiety.
@@momijiyamanishi4548 disorder can go in multiple directions
DO NOT PRIVATIZE;
- Healthcare
- Defense
- Education
- Justice
- Infrastructure (Road, Water, Waste)
- Telecom
Any industry where economies of scale lower cost to deliver the service while your target audience is (choice, geographically, financially) captive, or their mortality is at risk.
Health care is mostly there and defense is almost there. Scary to think corporations control police and military,
Perfect. I would add Energy to your list, as well. Should be a common investment for the good if all. I think we'd be closer to Green than we are if we didn't have corporate interests whining about cost over profits.
Daniel Miskowiec, I think you are too late on most accounts.
Wrong. All of those should be privatized.
Well Jimmy, the problem here is they already are. How's that highest private cost of healthcare, education and price gouging duopoly in Telecom working out so far
Yes, we have toll roads here in SoCal that were built by private companies who “went bankrupt”, forcing the state to bail them out! Just like the US auto industry!
Lexus Lanes ?
The US auto industry, thankfully for us, paid back the loan bailout, with interest. I'm curious, who has ownership of those toll roads now? Did the state take ownership? Private toll roads don't sound like something that would be in the best interest of tax payers.
@@donnale3881 Nope. The state got a 10 billion loss www.thebalance.com/auto-industry-bailout-gm-ford-chrysler-3305670
A company that mostly just collects money, went bankrupt?!?
Socialism for the rich, Capitalism for the poor.
Anything that forms a natural monopoly, such as utilities., should be either heavily regulated or owned by the government on behalf of the electorate. In many ways, government ownership is a form of regulation.
utilities can be owned locally by the citizens, too - I think that is even better - home owners or local communities owning solar cell fields and windmills, for example - they pay for it with their taxes and they own it! - benefits go directly to the owners, the people
Exactly put.
@@riodejaneiro7675 - in a "representative democracy", "We The People" ARE, by proxy, "the Government".
Corruption borne crony capitalism and lobbying for privitization have gone wrong and can be fixed with "the Government's" (We The People) intervention. For example:
Once we have Single Payer/Medicare For All, then those greedy 'for profit' insurance/drug companies will be forced to compete against the actual real cost of healthcare instead of charging their greedy profit oriented monopoly prices. Toooo bad... soooo sad that they'll have to lower their greedy profits while having to provide higher quality care and service to appeal to those who would choose to buy healthcare from them instead of using our Public Option of Medicare For All. I'm sure the greedy Republicans and foolishly ignorant *Trump* *Apologists* will all cry bitter tears for those poooor greedy Billionaire CEO's! Sooooo sad.
- Citizens: SPREAD THE WORD! BE SURE AND HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOUR FAMILY, YOUR FRIENDS AND YOUR CO-WORKERS. THE MEDIA IS OWNED, BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, BY CORRUPT BIG PHARMA AND GREEDY INSURANCE COMPANIES. THE MEDIA WON'T ALLOW THIS INFORMATION TO BE BE SHOWN. IT'S UP TO YOU AND ME TO SPREAD THE WORD!
Go to Bernie Sanders website.
Go to Thom Hartmann's website.
Go to PatrioticMillionaires .org.
TH-cam Dr Richard Wolff.
Inform yourselves! Because if you don't even know what your choices are, then you have No choices.
THINKING IS PATRIOTIC!
@@modemmark421 wish I could give you a hundred thumbs up for that awesome post.
I work for a municipal water and wastewater services provider. The general consensus in the industry is that private water and wastewater providers generate their (short-term) profits at the expense of reducing maintenance and reducing (or even eliminating!) investment in longer term capital projects.
Therefore, keep essential community services such as water and wastewater under the control and ownership of the community, i.e. the city, the county.
Yep. They tripled our rates when they came to town. The water became undrinkable for weeks at a time. The only visible thing I have seen them do is install new meters that do not require manual reading. They may have done things in the water treatment area that can't be seen. But they certainly never replaced all the mains like they claimed they would before coming to town.
Very good presentation. I'm a recovering privatization-enthusiast who learned better from experience.
Barton have you seen the story of the city in Georgia that voted to become an independent municipal and outsourced all public services except police and firefighters? Their a example of privatization done right.
@@bonda_racing3579 I bet they did it by not paying their share of the debt created by building their city.
The last few years have really soured me on the whole idea of privatization.
You will soon be a starving anti tax payer funded programs protestor
Number 6: Don't privatize when the service/infrastructure has been paid for by public funds (e.g. tax dollars, publicly funded loans, etc.). Too often, state governments are selling/leasing/contracting public infrastructure (e.g. roads) to private firms who get paid for little to nothing more than what the government was already providing, and usually at a lower cost.
The reason for this is usually "revenue sharing". For example, with toll roads, the private company charges a toll and, in exchange, is supposed to maintain those roads and share some of the revenue with the local government. This ends up only being tax shifting. It "covers" politicians by allowing them to complain that they have cut taxes/reduced government spending, while shifting the actual costs (plus a NEW profit margin for the company) to tolls (a new name for a tax levied by a private company), which are typically paid by those who benefit less from the roads themselves (i.e. workers/consumers, rather than businesses).
And the private companies can either give up their contract or "go bankrupt" when high costs come up. After all, according to Pres. Trump, doing so after sucking all the money out of the company, "is smart business"... leaving the taxpayer holding the bill, again. Businesses have become particularly good at "privatizing the profits and socializing the losses".
Just to be clear, the idea that PRIVATIZATION is "lower cost" is a myth. Government services do not have a profit motive. While there may be some waste (due to incompetence/corruption), there is only ONE way for a private company to provide a service for less. By reducing its costs.
How do you "reduce costs"? Here are a few ways:
1. Employ fewer people. And, usually, by doing this, it means by providing a lower level of service.
2. Pay the people you employ less. Again, this has consequences. These consequences include, but are not limited to: Lower skilled employees, reduced spending in the community (by those employed), worse services, fewer benefits for those employed, etc.
3. Cutting the level/number of services. We end up getting less per dollar.
There are things that business provide well. However, public services are not those things. They are called PUBLIC SERVICES because SOCIETY (i.e. we, the people), as a whole, benefits from them. All government is not bad and all business is not good. We need to keep that in mind.
There are things in life that we need to keep in mind are not negotiable. Staying alive, for one. Most ambulance services are now privatized. When you need an ambulance to go to the hospital because you believe you (or a loved one) is in dire need of medical attention, do you ask for what the ride will cost? No. You call 911 and get the transport. Even in a local market, the difference in cost (that you pay for) for an ambulance ride can be tremendous.
Anyway, my $.02...
Here they love to privitise roads with high tolls. Unfortunately the government shuts down roads to make a bottleneck forcing people to use them. When people still refused to use them. The government bailed them out, gave them tax cuts and paid for enhancements to their roads. Essentially we paid three times (through our taxes) so that we could drive on roads that were once free and they also get tax cuts. Most of our privatized roads are owned by one major investment group.
Andrew Lim Lmao so yeah the government should nationalize it and run it to the ground like they run everything to the ground . Healthcare under the government like you picture it in your socialist wet dreams will be a nightmare just like veteran affairs is a nightmare .
@@based_leopard4061 Nice spam you're posting on every comment regardless of how relevant it is. I hope you're at least getting paid by TPUSA and not just peddling this "privatize everything" nonsense so that some crony capitalist can get richer.
@@based_leopard4061 It's very well possible that the USA federal government isn't capable enough to run health care. But that's a failing of the USA federal government, not governmental health care in general. Most developed nations have governmental health care, and it works better than USA health care.
@@rutger5000 Who told you that? What metric outcomes have you seen that qualify your assertion of "better"? By what standards are your comparisons made? Legitimately asking.
@@WhoThrewThat I'm not an expert in the field. But the quality of health care can be expressed by a few metrics. Costs, impact on life expectancy, rate of complications and patient satisfaction can all be quantified reasonably well. And the USA doesn't do terribly well when compared to other nations. Costs especially running very high. "Google scholar" is your friend in getting more sources on this.
I worked in private prisons for three years (two different facilities) as a training manager, training correctional officers. The experience convinced me that running prisons should be an inherently public matter. This was for two reasons. First, the corporation (the largest in the industry, then and now) looked to cut corners (expenses) wherever possible. If the customer (local, state, or federal government) didn't anticipate something in the contract, they didn't get it. Second, the inmate's status (minimum security, medium security, etc.) was often affected by his/her disciplinary record. This, in turn, affected their release dates. (Minimum security inmates earn more time off for good behavior. Changing an inmate's status from minimum to medium could add months to their incarceration.) But who determined disciplinary infractions? The private company running the prison. I'm not saying the company encouraged punishing inmates and keeping them incarcerated longer. Far from it; the hassles of running the prison were much too great to be dabbling like that. But it gave the APPEARANCE it could happen, which is horrible.
Private prisons, by the way, exist not to incarcerate inmates--although the companies do run prisons. No. Instead, they exist to FINANCE AND BUILD prisons. See, getting a bond passed to pay for the construction of a new prison is difficult politically. But signing a contract with a private prison company to build and operate the prison--stretched out over a 20-year period--is much easier. Simply put, private prison companies are not in the business of RUNNING prisons. They're in the business of BUILDING prisons. That's why the one I worked at transformed itself into a REIT.
Personally, I don't think privatization adds value to education, incarceration, or health care.
I agree, privately run for-profit prisons probably at best serve to diminish the credibility of our criminal justice system.
Hey, why are states so cash strapped that they think they need to do this?
Why are states so short on dough that they sell mug shots to private companies who then publish them on the internet? Mug shots which include those of people subsequently found not guilty and which may not be possible to remove entirely from the web?
Prisons and hospitals are a neccecary evil and neccecary evils should never be privitized. Because it's in the direct interest of the bussinesses to make sure they don't work.
I've been wondering about that for many years. It seems like from the stories about food, there seems to be a problem in food preparation and refrigeration. Can you address that? And why are people in the 'public charge' not adequately provided for? Is is 'private company profit margin'?
Which should be privatised? Luxury products.
Which should be public? All necessities of life.
So food, water and air, then? Everything else is a luxury.
@@seannolan9857 pretty much, plus housing, medical and energy for residential.
although, I'd add in things like prisons and systems that make a country run, like national transport (because people being able to get to and from work easily and conveniently would build a stronger economy)
perhaps instead of necessities use the world essentials, but avoid the reductionist who will say we only need food,water,air. Police forces are essential for a modern society etc.
@@seannolan9857 food, water air, healthcare, education, transit, infrastructure, housing (in the sense of making profit not off of rent but off of speculating with the housing, gentrifying cities and driving out anyone who isn't well off etc. Since scarcity in housing = more money to be made)
edit: and yes, police/fire services would also be counted among that
@@nonegiven2830 you're forgetting some very critical things that human life depends upon & which can result in the actual death of individuals when controlled by other entities motivated by shareholder quarterly profit.
Sean is trying to box you in to agreeing with his statement without thoroughly reviewing it.
Like education, for example.
Just watch the documentary about Enron to understand how off the rails privatization can be.
That was a big screw up.
Every time a reich-wing idiot says "VENEZUELA!", drink a shot.
If, according to reich-winger in question, communism has killed over 100 million -> take a 10cl shot, 200 million -> 20cl shot, and so on and so on *sniff*
Add rules if you feel you aren't getting drunk fast enough.
P.S. Have Soviet Union's national anthem on repeat when playing this game.
Yes. This, exactly. You took the words out of my mouth. I live in San Diego, one of the first counties to de regulate electricity and suffer Enron's bullshit. That very first summer it happened, energy bills went through the roof and the county had rolling blackouts, I can remember being in school when the power went out. Everyone swore up and down de regulation would increase competition and innovation, which would lower costs. The exact opposite happened, costs doubled and quality of services decreased. There's just some shit where the incentives for private enterprise don't line up with keeping customer prices low.
just plain_name no link? Bot
845835ab, You mean the fraud that was forced into the light by the fact that the Bush Administration wasn’t giving them special consideration like the Clinton Administration?
I remember a case where two detainees in a privately run jail where handed over to foreign authorities for extradition without an extradition hearing, i.e. due process. That's just one example of many why incarceration should not be run with the same management model as a fast food franchise.
Credit card companies are privatizing the monetary system.
The US had public money with the greenbacks en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenback_(1860s_money) . But then privatized it via corporate banks. In the old countries we were stupid a whole lot earlier. The UK even pressured the US to make money making a free private activity.
You ain't gonna seriously propose to nationalize payment processing?
You can choose your credit card provider and if you have good credit... your intest rates are very low.
Privatized medicaid is killing us in Iowa...
Good work Robert Reich , Take that Devos !
Even in small countries like the Dominican Republic, the best insurance provider is run by the State. There are plenty of private insurance companies and none of them gives you anything close to what you get on the public one for less.
And a doctor makes less than 20k in the DR.
Why would ANYONE want to go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, 3-7 years of residency, sit for their boards only to make 20k ?
@@youtubesucks1499 the average doctor is making 5 or 6 times the minimum wage. I have a relative making a specializatio in medicine in NY that is going to work here in the Dominican Republic. One of my uncles is a gynecologist that lived in the USA for 2 decades and currently lives and work here too.
I want to wipe private "for profit" insurance off the face of the earth. The bigger the pool you have, the more efficiently the insurance system can work. All health, auto, and home insurance should be run by the government.
+Jess. I dont think that would work well. Insurance needs to be private in order to have "offers" that differ and are interesting to industries or similar. The government in this regards should regulate so one doesnt get "junk" insurance that isnt worth anything in practice. There are just so many different types of insurance out there that its unpractical for the government to run it. Heck, the government doesnt even insure anything because the combined cost would cost more than replacing whatever got lost. Be it a B1 bomber costing a billion dollars or a trash can costing one.
While socialized healthcare is compared to insurance. It doesnt really work like that. Its just similar in an analogical manner. Which is why nations like Norway, which has socialized healthcare, allow some private as well to compensate for those areas the government has more demand than supply. These few private clinics only serve those that are insured. Mostly being employers that want their employee back sooner rather than later, but the flip side is that if the employer takes the cost via the company insurance. The company pays for the operation and both the cost and spot in the socialized system isnt affected. Allowing someone that doesnt have access to insurance to go since the "employee" before him got the private version.
Obviously, you need a strict balance here to avoid "all" the good doctors going private and so on, but that is were regulation comes in and you limit the amount of private clinics there can be and what they can do.
Another example could be plastic surgery. Everything aimed towards beauty is private. While those that need it more in regards to "looking normal" after an accident or similar. Get it via the government for free.
@@Lobos222 it seems like what you're describing is public-private competition. If we were to apply this to a Medicare for all scenario, it might work like this.
You are automatically enrolled in payroll deductions for medicare just like social security and other taxes. However, you can choose to opt out by providing a policy code that you'd get by buying a plan through a private insurance company. This allows both the public and private options to both remain available. It would help drive down private insurance costs because these companies would have to compete directly with the public option. Major health networks would all be required to accept medicare. But a doctor operating in his own private practice would have the option to accept or not. As mentioned above , non reconstructive plastic surgery would only be covered by a private insurance policy.
How does that idea sound?
Health insurance yes, auto and home insurance companies should stay private.
@@linkplayer20 Its not "public-private competition" because the government dictates what the private sector can do. So the government would be like. We need more "knee operation" than we can handle. We now, for some time as we see fit, allow private sector to do some of them... So its wrong to view it like they are competing. The private sector is here just supplementing socialized healthcare in a manner that benefits society without starting to game the system for private interests.
What you are describing is something that wouldnt lover private insurance because the best hospitals, with the competent doctors, would lean more and more towards the private sector, because the wages will be better in order to game the system long term, until that aspect went critical mass and people would view the public option as bad in comparison. The very reason the private sectors cant do what they want in regards to healthcare where I live.
@@Lobos222 not quite. A private practice would be defined as a single doctor working out of their own place of business. A hospital or health networks would not fall under this. So even if all the best doctors were to jump ship from hospitals, they would just be further dividing market share between more people.
Also, it would still drive down private insurance costs because no one would go for the private option that offers less value for more cost. So private insurers would either have to increase the value of the product to exceed the value of the public option ( perhaps by covering cosmetic services that the public option won't) to justify the higher cost, or reduce the cost to remain directly competitive with the public option.
As a side, we already dictate would private hospitals can do, so that whole part of your argument goes out the window
Rather than having municipal or private ownership of energy, water, education and health infrastructure, we should set up perpetual Co-Operatives that are owned by communities.
And full requisition of property & assets of people who inevitably steal from them. Also xcellent audits, oversight. The eagle beagles hover overhead ready and waiting to swoop when or if Co-op meets their end. Cos of poor management.?plus
A socialist in America 🙂
Communication should be a public concern. Billionaires currently own our Internet and the algorithm.
Like power companies,
"Being the only game in town" works great for the profit margin
Remember I live in Michigan I don’t care people know that and they pass laws here that say we can’t create our own power we can’t put solar on our roofs we can’t put generators in our yard and we can’t bring up our own water because it’s all private sized it’s ridiculous and when you try they get upset now they also have a big problem with people doing their own work on their own house oh my god they flipped right out because they need to have people involved that need to make money I guess I told him to get bent is my property and ain’t your decision don’t tell your neighbor what to do it ain’t none of your business
@@ericneering6357 it's the same way here in Florida, unless your name is Disney
Excellent lesson. I wish we started studying all this in elementary school. Understanding this sort of thing is priceless when it comes to surviving and making good decisions in a hugely complex society.
It's simple: Public services should never be privatized.
Should private services never be publicized?
That is an absolutely moronic statement. There are certain things that should be privatized, and some that shouldn’t be. You can’t just say they should “never be privatized”. There are different solutions for different services.
@@libertybiberty8182 Agreed.
Ultimately, why not allow people to vote on the matter of which services are privatised?
Seems like a fair solution to me.
Each to their own i guess.
Don't privatize anything! I have yet to see a good use for this.
So the government runs things better than the private sector? Because it doesn’t the private sector does nearly everything better than the government
@@nolanpierce4116 can't hear your argument while you gargle that boot lol wall St crashes every decade and is incredibly inefficient and costly. Our most efficient systems are welfare ones. Facts don't care about your feelings.
Healthcare, internet, prisons, postal service, telephone service, education must be public.
6. Dont privatize when the commodity is an essential human need such as Water, Gas, Electricity, etc.
Robert, you and your friends (the folks that help you produce these extremely informative videos) are PILLARS of DEMOCRACY!!! Keep up the GOOD WORK!!!
+1
you're very right because:
- public schools are known to produce great students
- the postal service turns a massive profit every year
- private military totally doesn't have the incentive to keep things as cheap and efficent (which ultimately benefits shareholders and the public) as possible
Noting that a combination of humans, and the public good ought never be privatized?
These are key to our being a democracy rather than a corporation.
As, per my norm, thank you, Robert and crew. My former neighbors Ken and Kitty Galbraith are applauding from somewhere.
Robert Reich is ALWAYS right! And so easy to understand!
Do NOT privatise anything that is for the betterment of the people, i am NOT including share-holders here, who are usually the only ones who benefit from privatisation!!
It's so obvious that it's sad that that has to be explained, but only folks in their 50s 60s and 70s will remember the difference.
Give me back the years when regulations were in place and privatization was not around. Monopolies were stopped.
Stores are the only thing that should be private. Transportation, energy, judicial and prison system should never be privatized.
Also things that affect people's lives like healthcare and education.
I think it's revealing that Nebraska has the lowest power rates. Public power has been the norm there since the '40s.
Food stores?
I think every reason you make about not privatizing something is a reason to socialize something else. You say we should not privatize education because its purpose is to being us together. By the same token, I say we should socialize the internet. My home town has a municipal ISP called SELCO and it repairs quickly while being cheaper than everything else nearby, on top of being subject to the first amendment as a government operation.
Holobrine Lmao so yeah the government should nationalize it and run it to the ground like they run everything to the ground . Healthcare under the government like you picture it in your socialist wet dreams will be a nightmare just like veteran affairs is a nightmare .
L 3/5 I said socialize, not nationalize. It works just fine at the local government level. I know from personal experience, that’s now my home town does it.
@@based_leopard4061
The VA is so problematic because it draws out of the same funding pool as the active military and defense department.
It has to compete for funds with current operations and with bloated defense contracts like the gawdawful 1.5 trillion dollar F35.
As a consequence the VA is criminally underfunded and we all ought to be royally pissed about it.
Single payer would be more like insurance, only we all get the same insurer. Instead of premiums, we'd pay taxes. We'd still go to private clinics and hospitals, not a public health system like the VA.
And yeah, the VA needs a boot up the ass.
w b, thank you for posting factual information in response to rhetoric. Some minds may not necessarily be change because subjective facts are a thing these days, but some of us appreciate the opportunity to learn.
Privitization is taking a publicly owned asset and giving it to a private entity who will take over and charge us for running the operation. Now we have no say in how the asset is administered, no ability to control price hikes or the characters of the Board of Directors. It's a giveaway from the middle class to the 1%. We don't have socialism here but it is a more cooperative society where people pay a little more in taxes and, in turn, get a higher standard of iving, free college, free daycare and other valuable benefits. Right now, Betsy Devos and the Republicans are trying to starve public education so they can bolster for-profit charter schools. Most peple done know or care what's going on.
Privatisation has ruined Australia's electricty industry.
John M and our public education systems.
Once again, spot on Mr. Reich. Your intuitive, and common sense approach to this, and many other issues make you a perfect fit to lead one of the top posts in the next administration.
We've already privatized our infrastructure. The government doesn't build bridges. They pay for it, but businesses have always built it.
I would like to see more privatized power companies. E.g. more power options, like solar, hydro, nuclear, wind, or whatever it takes to keep these folks honest with competitive prices. Sometimes I look at my bill and feel like I'm getting shived.
Simple way to do this is to make all electrical and gas for homes a nonprofit situation they cannot make any profit on it all they can do is put money away to fix pipes and wires and pay their employees and then make cost the cost of what that cost is to get that to the Home you Gotta stop greed when it comes to safety in life you got a quit passing laws that says it’s illegal for somebody to take care of their family simple that’s what they do if you live in the city you can’t become your own power station because they passed a law that says it’s illegal for you that’s wrong this is America you don’t have the right to tell anybody on their property how to live I truly believe that down in my soul quit telling your neighbor what to do worry about you I wanna build something on my property the powers to be will tell me I can’t because the banks and mortgage companies have spent a lot of money to figure out how to make properties worth more money which is wrong ain’t none of your business what I do on my own property please let’s ban together and get rid of this this is America you don’t have the right to tell me . And you shouldn’t have the right to restrain me for making my own power or heat simple
It astounds me that the pro-privatization GOP doesn't understand this simple distinction. It makes me feel that they do and are nefarious in their intent to give public contracts to private entities in order to gain political favor (power) with all that entails.
I just don't think they care if people die or have their lives messed up, as long as it's not a rich person like them.
The pro-privatization GOP understands exactly what privatization means. Their intent is to allow corporations (including themselves and their cronies and donors) to profit from anything they can get their hands on regardless of the consequences to the public. Republicans care about their own bank accounts and the power money gives them. These GOP "free market" and privatization proponents LOVE corporate welfare (tax breaks, subsidies, etc.), but demonize public welfare.
They want it all for themselves and try to distract and divert your attention by selling you the snake oil of trickle-down economics. Why do you think Republicans love all the Republican tax cuts, from Reagan to Bush to Trump, that they have never paid for, but then they stand firmly against public policies like Medicare for All saying "how are you going to pay for it?" (By the way Medicare for All will be cheaper than our current system. It cuts out the greedy health insurance profiteers, doesn't require huge marketing expenditures, and Medicare's current administrative costs are far lower than those of private insurers.)
The most efficient transport system (Japan's rail system) is privately owned and operated. Perhaps that says something different about privatization than this video states.
@@spongebrainsqueezepants7175 You think Democrats are any better? Lmao.
@@lmy2366 but I bet Japanese privatization is completely different from American privatization. I bet the Japanese government heavily regulated this privatization to benefit them. If you allow someone to just do whatever they want they’ll look for the shittiest and most cruel way of getting more money.
"...around 1980" - the favorite euphemism for the 1st Reagan administration.
Exactly. Reagan's election was the beginning of our downfall as a nation.
Don't forget Maggie Thatcher in UK!
@@joachimthielker3132 who could ever forget that old skinbag?
Reagan was the spokesman for years for GE before entering politics. He was thoroughly indoctrinated by the management there, that hated being restrained in any way. Reagan embraced Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand, two of the most successful corporate suck-ups and shills of the past century. The pendulum is swinging away from their extreme insanity. They wanted to unshackle capitalism and instead they have taken us a long way back down the road towards fuedalism.
Even saying private companies are good for their shareholders is somewhat optimistic. There's more than one example of where the interests of the executives who make the decisions were favored over those of the shareholders.
I'm for Co-Ops, profit-sharing among employees (labor and management alike) and making shareholding illegal. It is absolutely insane that someone can just sit on their butt and rake in millions without having lifted a finger toward the production of that commodity or service from which they accumulate their wealth. Our system is built upon the Dutch-British Charter system. It is built upon greed and the thirst for blood.
While those that actually do the work often struggle to make ends meet.
So what happens when a company needs outside financing and it is already extremely levered? The LLC joint stock corporation is one of the greatest inventions man ever made, enabling corporations to finance projects spanning entire continents like pipelines, and you want to end as much?
Well, go start a co-op. I am sure you will have no problems risking your life savings to open one.
Good luck. I really hope you succeed.
@@lmy2366 Most people who want to start a co-op and are against stock holders have zero idea how to start and fund a business.
They will never risk their life savings to start a business.
As someone in Canada where we have contacted out certain parts of healthcare and education delivery, ie., Cleaning and transportation it has neither reduced costs nor improved the delivery. There are a few more millionaires running around telling us it is a wonderful thing but they are less convincing everyday.
Look what happened with student loans and the cost of colleges.
Most of the student defaults are from students that went to for profit colleges. SOLUTION: Do not have the government back ANY student load to a for-profit college. Allow the student to take bankruptcy if they cannot pay the load back and the college was a for-profit school!
Another word for for-profit colleges - SCAM.
@@redmeat4vegans62 no, the solution is to get rid of worthless degrees.
Thanks to Federal student loan guarantees
The solution is that going 90 days without sufficiently paying back a debt should be punishable by death. If the consequences are severe enough, you'll see far fewer people using money they don't have for an education that people of their class could never benefit from.
@@seannolan9857 Debt shouldn't be given so easily
Robert Reich should run for president, he knows the system in and out and has White House experience
If something is a natural monopoly (such as electricity distribution) it is better off in public hands.
How about if you’re going to privatize something, you need to also privatize cost and risk. I’m also getting sick of privatizing access to public information like weather data, tax computations, navigational and geographical data, basic research grants. If we funded it, you don’t get to own it or charge us to see/use it.
Agree. It's fun and all while things are booming but when the stuff hits the fan then somehow the many must bail out the few. Like i say for insurance companies, they should be capable to pay all of their policies at once if needed, as in never to have more clients than they can sustain. If something seems not good for business then don't make that business. Money should not just make more money by default, everything must grow each year. Cover expenses and that's that, keep the activity moving on, you don't need profits to provide services indefinitely. I mean, it's impossible to have profits indefinitely, nothing is infinite. Find the balance to keep things going in order to provide a value to society and maintain that on a steady flat line.
Well done Mr. Reich! This message needs to desperately get out to the American people, the public 😊, post haste!
And thank you too!! Keep up the great work!!!
Great simple logic that should be the backbone of decision making in the country.We need more people like Mr. Reich
I retired from my local government as an electrician with facilities management. The county privatized utilities, vehicle maintenance and wanted to privatize our department. Our department head had to turn in a bid just like the outside companies. Long story short when representative for the county went to check on the low bidders work they found it below the standards we were doing in house. Than the cost over runs in both utilities and vehicle maintenance caused them to be brought back in house at the end of their contracts. These companies promise slot for what seems like little money but you need to look at what they leave out of those bids. When an emergency repair or replacement is needed you find out that's not covered under the contract and you end up paying twice what it should cost to do the work.
As a European: dont privatize energy, electricity, gas, water, railroads, public transport. All basic needs should remain under public influence. Whatever the cost may be,. Because it isnt a market. Water is just water and heat heat, etc. It only allows in-between layers of overhead and enriching nonsense. Though changing mgtmt in senior rangs every 5 year would be a good thing
Another way to put #5: Consumer choice must always be possible. One of the worst ideas in this bracket is water privatisation. Every person should have the right to cheap and safe tap water where such a thing is feasible. Here in Germany, some madmen were actually considering this while the US shows clearly how much of a shitshow water privatisation can become. Flint is far from an isolated case and from what I've heard, water tastes of chlorine (among other things) pretty much year-round in places. It's a simple "business" where you can't do much different from the competition and you usually can't choose. Whoever thought you could privatise that was utterly nuts.
All utilities such as electricity ,Gas,Water, Public Transport, Roads, Highway Maintainence,Health Service,Police Service,Fire Service,Ambulance Service,School and College Education, Libraries, Public toilets, Recreational Parks and Open Spaces and play areas for children should be Publically owned and funded to serve the common good of all.
I'd like to se Mr Reich take his message to a larger audience, such as on the riad to universites and other countries.
He has and he take his message everywhere. Not to many people listened to him. He's been speaking out precisely on this topic since he was Secretary of Labor.
Other countries? We already work like that. US is so far behind
Public:
Healthcare
Education
Public safety (police, fire, health, food, drugs, etc.)
Environmental management
Libraries and museums
Private:
Food industry
Retail
Robert Reich touches all the most important concerns about privatization.
Education, energy, and health care should not be privatized.
Amazon is licking their chops for the postal service to fold.
Good call, Literally about to watch an upcoming video of the post office working on privatization
i like that Reich defined a filter to what best fits public vs private ownership. Then we can discuss whether those "rules" are valid and then see if they fit what is and what should be publicly owned.
Aside--- It's interesting that folks will buy stock in a company and become a part owner and accept dividends, yet then turn around and demand that there shouldn't be public ownership of utilities and roads. As if the govt isn't like a corporation with a CEO/president, directors, managers, supervisors, employees, suppliers, and policies, operational and maintenance procedures and processes, revenue and expenses, a charter, and shareholder participation.
Citizens are the shareholders of the Fed, state, and city govts. The Constitution and charters are articles of incorporation. Seems simple, at least to me.
So well said, Dr. Reich. We need you, thank you very much. As a background thought, there is no positive future for anybody if the needs of our social fabric are steadily ignored, in the name of short-term quick profiting . Everything is not about what we earn or deserve as individuals; the word community exists for a reason, and no I am not a communist. I simply believe that civility and safety are better off in a world that truly takes into consideration the needs of those who actually are in need, .... really, not just for marketing. Exhausting, he? (I must be canadian, I wrote he) Thanks again Dr. Reich, common sense is precious, however not as common as we wish.
Yeah, I'm like... what is gonna happen for these people once they've ground the rest of humanity into the dirt? Are their lives going to be better, or even much different? I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but following this line of thought makes me wonder if people really are colonizing Mars. What is there to gain from sucking everything dry...?
"~-::Spaceforce::-~" ((rolls eyes))
Only this administration could make literally the entire solar system sound rape-y.
Who's gonna build something like that?? Not the losers making constant power-grabs; their doughy hands don't know what work feels like.
As an Europe i cant understand how you can privatizice sheriffs, jails, medicare etc. Its so sick.
Clearly Healthcare and education should be public. The trend toward private prisons should be reversed. I’m beginning to think too now that energy should also have a public run company much as there is another countries. This is more complicated and there are plenty of good and bad Examples, but Norway is a good model. Further you can drive renewable energy sources better than commercial companies who have resisted this and do away with subsidies all together at the same time. Private security forces military theaters of operation need to be gone. They are nothin more than mercenaries with too much power, little oversight and attract too many that don’t care about communities they operate. They’re as bad or worse than private prisons.
Public energy in Russia: you can't get electricity when you want. You have to queue for permits. Some dude who controls the permitting process is filthy rich by virtue of being at the right place at the right time. Meanwhile the entrepreneur is at his Mercy.
You can't sell excess energy off your solar or wind.
And guess what, albeit being public, the gov, and Putin in particular still rents out the system to their cronies. To 3 ppl. Yes three people control the entire grid of Russia. All the stations, all the grid. And they won't allow competition.
@@a4yster Russia is run by a quasi dictator and is not a democratic country.. your comparing apples to oranges here
If a member of Congress doesn't support Medicare for All, vote that person out. I don't care what party they belong to. I don't care what their other policies support. They don't put the health of Americans first, so they need to go.
Health & education should not be privatized
Public education is a sad example of a well-intended but mostly failed government program. I have several grandchildren who were homeschooled and the better for it. I have (2) two nieces that quit their public school teaching jobs appalled by the system and mayhem in the classroom. As a contractor, I did several projects for both York and Harrisburg City School districts. With one (1) exception what I saw was pitiful. Reich is either willfully ignorant or has an agenda. Lastly, about 50% of college freshmen take both remedial math and English classes and we rank poorly when compared to other modern countries.
@@1Skeptik1 -....and oh what a world it was b4 public education....
I grew up in Helsinki, Finland and now I find myself in Manhattan Beach, California. I find apparent big public / private differences on the municipal level. Helsinki buses are operated by private companies, here it is public. Here I often see city work vehicles with people standing around, some doing some work, In Helsinki I remember private contractors doing those things. I do agree with the five areas that you mentioned. Basically private enterprise works for the consumer if there is competition for price and quality and there is enough choice. We still need rules to take into account harmful effects, such as no longer bringing us together.
Hi from New Zealand,
The 5 rules of thumb for when public services should not be privatized was interesting.
NZ privatized prisons to an Australian contractor and had to turn them back to state owned, because the inmates started fight clubs within the prison system. Someone muggled a smart phone into the prison and started to film them live. NZ also privatized intellectually handicap hospitals and completely deinstitutionalized psychiatric hospitals. While it does have some merit, not totally sure
it was the right move?
Once again, thank you for the education, and sharing your wealth of knowledge with the world.
I like that he doesn't just bash privatisation in general, but explains the core principles and exactly when they are a problem.
Gives his arguments so much more weight!
In Australia we should not of privatized ~ Natural Gas, electricity and water supply, it is a disaster
Your talks are great. Please promote then better so the truth is known and we can all beat witness to it fearlessly!
This is just great. I’m super annoyed by this issue.,
But this is great information.
Robert your videos are so well done and educationally informative that I wish all Americans were watching and shared in schools.You and Richard Wolff are excellent teaches.
Your a patriot in my book.
Why didn't you run for President.?
The only time you shouldnt privatize is when there isnt going to be enough competition to keep prices low. Competitve markets benefit consumers every time.
6) Don't privatise anything that could be considered 'Critical National Infrastructure'.
The ability of any service to be so requisite to day to day and other businesses life that to remove it (or simply the threat of its removal) would cause severe harm to sections of the community is a destructive one that should not be in the hands of private interests. Particularly when those interests may have no stake in the communities or businesses they are affecting, other than to make a gain at their expense.
Supplemental infrastructure can be private, but the basic ability to access resources that all basic aspects of modern living a reliant upon must be available to all if a society is to be able to truly call itself civilised.
This all assumes that private companies are unregulated, which is the reality today. With proper regulation some of the reasons given in this video would not apply. We have to kill private companies' ability to control government. We need to vote for politicians who won't take PAC money or money from corporations.
As long as there is government to legislate and enforce regulations, they will be "money" in politics.
I had a friend that worked for a private social service agency and their goal was to keep clients on the need because they got paid by the number of clients they had so they certainly didn't want the people they were helping to get off.
imagine if the employees were also the shareholders for every corporation.
that didnt went well to enron employees...
@@jorgegomez524 works wonderfully with the mondragon employees.
Those would be either cooperatives, co-deterministic corporations, or corporations where the employees are engaging in funds-socialism.
I wish Libertarians would listen to this. I know far too many libertarians who think that unregulated privatized EVERYTHING would be superior to anything government. I guess they're mostly asleep to all the abuses that go on every hour of every day in the private sector.
All vital and natural resources should be owned by the state. Every large corporation with large profits should be collectively owned. All medium sized business should be worker owned. Only small businesses and human capital should be privatized! There should be limits to income inequality, end winner take all salaries, maximum salaries should be imposed, and there should be policies for a more equal income distribution. Economic democracy and state regulation should have direct control over the profit and income distribution. Financial incentives can be used to structure economic behavior to meet socialist goals. Finance, healthcare, education, housing, and nonprofit trust funds should be state owned or collectively owned.
Privatization is not "done right or wrong," its all about ideology. If you are a left liberal like Reich then you believe individuals should own most of the capital and only a few things should be publicly owned. If you are a socialist most of the capital should be collectively owned while only a few things should be individually owned. Reich does not mind extreme inequality as long as some money gets redistributed to the poor. Socialists believe that inequality rips apart a collectivist society. Therefore they believe in a lot more equality than liberals do. Liberals should be brutally murdered and disposed of into the nearest trash dumpster. People die under liberalism
Wooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwww you sound like a socialist. Ah, I see. No. It had been tried all over the world, and it sucked. No.
I don't agree workers should own everything but as stakeholders in a corporation, they should have a say in how it it run. Unions did that once.
I totally agree. In Germany we also had a wave of privatisation, but not as hard as in the US. E.g. I find it good that we privatized our air-company, because before the privatization flying was incredible expensive while today it's way cheaper. But I'm glad we didn't privatized much of health care or universities, so that both of them are free. I'm also not a fan to renationalize everything cause sometimes it's just the lack of money rather than the lack of public control. And when I remember that in East Germany people had to wait at least 15 years for their cars, you can see that some things are better done by companies than by the state.
Maybe no business should be totally privatize. Would prefer that government regulates profits like some of the European nation so to not create oligarchs that swing government control to private control.
If privatization is allowed to continue the way it is our country will not last.
Thanks for your service sir!
All necessities should not be privatised: food, water, electricity, living, roads, healthcare etc. only luxury stuff should depend on private market because those can't exploit depedancies
For the school buses it means desperate school districts sell their fleets for short term profit and then got screwed when the private company jacked up their rates.
Not just that the privatized companies don't care if the buses get fixed or the employees get a good fair wage, they only care about profits, and since when should there be profits in taking children to school!
First student is an example of that
I remember the 80s and how Lobbyists from the USA pressured german politicians to put forward privatizations of our institutions and public goods. Nowadays we struggle with the results. One of the reasons why the UK is leaving the EU is that the EU has regulations which do not allow nationalize again once privatized industries as that would go against investors of capital and we can't have that or can we now.
Government can borrow at much cheaper rates when it comes to infrastructure.
In the past, companies had a public service element to them. Which is why a sovereign people would grant such powers and immunities to corporations. Now, they claim that their only obligation is to shareholder value. Why should we privatize if they are declaring, in the very beginning, that share value is their only goal?
I still don't understand why we continue to use the euphemistic term "privatization", when a better and more accurate term would be "PROFITIZATION". Because that's the main difference. PROFIT for the "private" corporations taking over these services.
But that profit is an incentive to keep costs low, and their reputation is in the line. Both don’t happen in the public sector, se we get cases where the government will pay $2 million to build a small public toilet... where a private company would pay $200k
WE NEED MEDICARE FOR ALL!!!!
"Defense contractors" are more aptly named "Offense contractors".
When was the last time the US was attacked by a foreign nation and had to defend US soil? Pearl Harbor?
I may be missing some more recent cases, but most US military action since then has been offensive.
I believe that having a public option for consumers for every single product or service, would allow us to see clearly what industries are benefited by privatization and what industries better serve the public by being public. Consumers would always have a choice on which items or services to buy, services that compete well with quality and price that could use the profits to fund public programs could take the tax burden off of citizens. If done well it could end the need to debate over tax rates vs public programs to lift up people in poverty. Socially responsible citizens could choose daily to contribute to the good of their fellow citizens while contrarians could choose to not to purchase government goods, but may decide to because of better price, higher quality, better treatment of workers, or the products being more eco friendly.
How do we, as a society, stop privatization for the reasons you mentioned?
Vote!
Good Question. I'm ready to sign up.
Always vote blue.
There’s the French method, to which I subscribe
Don't vote for members of Congress who take corporate money. Especially don't vote for them if they don't support Medicare for all.
I think all forms of transportation should be public like flights, trains, taxi drivers and so on because everyone will need it to travel.
Research & development of medicines & perscriptions. Our public universities used to!
Still do.
@@dannmarceau but not like the good old days. Now BIG PHARMA steps in & synthesize what used to be plant based medicines. Big pharma & greed have snatched up the inventions for their bottom dollar. Everything is about money. If it wasn't the engine that got 100+ mpg would be in every vehicle.
The sciences are sold out also. Research for profits only or mostly.
My belief -- Government should provide those services that private business either: a) can't provide; b) won't provide; and c) can be trusted to provide.
What if the NIH was expanded to take over drug research in order to preserve innovation after moving the U.S. to a single-payer healthcare system?
things that should be privately owned:
your house
your car
anything that is personal property, that you do not use to extract value from somebody else's labor (e.g. a factory is NOT personal property)
things that should be publicly owned:
all of the means of production (factories, refineries, manufacturing, everything we consider "industry")
all of the means to repair/maintain all publicly owned machinery/infrastructure
transport (trains, planes, buses)
natural resources
utilities (water, electricity)
agriculture
schools
research labs
large dwelling houses like apartments and condominiums
Mr. Reich you have been so informative I have been learning a lot that I had forgotten from college days Thank you very much 😊❤️
Privatization of any service that can be performed by the Gov't at lower cost, should not be allowed. Many unions have a stipulation that a cost study be done before ANY services can be contracted. Many Gov't agencies retain anti union law firms that push for contracting and managers that comply with no knowledge of how it affects their employees, budgets or themselves. Rarely does a contractor perform the job as cost effectively or to the same level of quality. They do everything they can to render as much profit and expend the least amount of manpower/resources while doing it. This is NOT a better choice for our country or our citizens. It's only a benefit for corporations and their shareholders. Meaning more of our tax dollars are spent for less service, higher cost and bigger profits for the already wealthy! All privatization should be required to go through the above mentioned cost analysis. That way, most wouldn't exist!