Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 41
Send Topic Print
privatisation (Read 24784 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48219
At my desk.
privatisation
Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm
 
Quote:
It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt.


That's not why they do it.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:37pm by freediver »  

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
wombatwoody
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 3062
Wombat  NSW
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #1 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 6:24pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm:
Quote:
It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt.


That's not why they do it.


Then say why you think not.


Back to top
 

We are benefiting from ... the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.

Benjamin Netanyahu, quoted in Ma’ariv, 16 April 2008
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48219
At my desk.
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #2 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm
 
For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 44379
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #3 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:04pm
 
The private owners run them worse, only interested in ripping out as much money in as short a time as possible
Back to top
 

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48219
At my desk.
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #4 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:28pm
 
How do you know this?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 44379
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #5 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:31pm
 
SA, Statewide power blackout?
Back to top
 

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48219
At my desk.
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #6 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm
 
What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 81413
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #7 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 10:58pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm:
What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?


Nothing except the shareholders and over-priced bosses wouldn't have been there to pay....
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 81413
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #8 - Apr 10th, 2022 at 11:00pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm:
For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.



Why not?  Business certainly isn't doing much of a job of it....... time to resume them.

Explain to us why government should not be in those businesses in the first place..... that's the liberal business party line, but explain it to those of us who pay for it..... ..

Why should matters of national security not be in government hands, rather than in the hands of people who can sell it to some antithetical group?

Who controls the power while the power powers you? Who runs the roads while the roads ruin you?  Who trains the trains while the trains train you to pay much more?  Who ferries the ferries while the fairies fairy you?

What if ANY of these major infrastructure items fell into the hands of a controlling group that was allied with a nation that suddenly declared war on us?

Prevention is better than cure.........
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48219
At my desk.
Re: privatisation
Reply #9 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:20am
 
Because their management is too heavily influenced by politics. If you look at the workplace culture of state owned enterprises compared to privately owned ones it is always the same thing - unproductive, unmotivated.

A competitive marketplace will deliver the goods cheaper. Ultimately, it is for the same reason why capitalist economies are so much wealthier than the communist ones. Communism gives you an idea of what happens when the government controls all the businesses. So unless there is a sound economic reason - that is, a condition that makes a market failure both inevitable and worse than the alternative of government ownership - democratic governments around the world have been steadily unloading state owned assets.

Which industries do you consider to be a matter of national security?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 42015
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #10 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 10:56am
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 11:00pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm:
For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.



Why not?  Business certainly isn't doing much of a job of it....... time to resume them.

Explain to us why government should not be in those businesses in the first place..... that's the liberal business party line, but explain it to those of us who pay for it..... ..

Why should matters of national security not be in government hands, rather than in the hands of people who can sell it to some antithetical group?

Who controls the power while the power powers you? Who runs the roads while the roads ruin you?  Who trains the trains while the trains train you to pay much more?  Who ferries the ferries while the fairies fairy you?

What if ANY of these major infrastructure items fell into the hands of a controlling group that was allied with a nation that suddenly declared war on us?

Prevention is better than cure.........



National Security
Foreign investment is important for Australia’s long term economic success, stability and prosperity.

However, risks to Australia’s national interest, particularly national security, have increased as a result of developments including rapid technological change and changes in the international security environment.

The national security test provides the Treasurer with the ability to address new and emerging national security risks from foreign investment. The national security test:

requires mandatory notification of proposed investments in national security land, interests in exploration tenements over national security land, a proposed direct investment in a national security business or starting a new national security business;

allows investments that are not notified to be ‘called‑in’ for review on national security grounds;

allows investors who choose to voluntarily notify to receive certainty from being subject to ‘call‑in’; and

provides a last resort power, which, in exceptional circumstances, permits the Treasurer to impose conditions, vary existing conditions, or, as a last resort, require the divestment of any approved investment where national security risks emerge. This power is subject to a number of safeguards.


https://firb.gov.au/national-security
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
SadKangaroo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


#FightStupid

Posts: 15194
Mianjin (Brisbane)
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #11 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:51am
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:28pm:
How do you know this?


Privatisation transfers the model of the entity away from service to profit.

When you do this on an infrastructure level, especially when there are protections for the company when things go wrong and governments willing to bail them out because they simply can't fail, it's even worse.

But we're getting way ahead of ourselves.

The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument.

I know there are far more important examples of infrastructure, but take Broadband as an example.

The private ISPs put money into the most profitable areas and that was it.  Regional let alone Rural Australia was left out.  Even Telstra's billions they wanted to spend pre-NBN, it was only in profitable areas and they wanted exemptions to their minimum service obligations under legislation in return.

The private sector was never going to operate services at a loss, even if they can recoup those costs from the inner city customers, it's just not good business.  If a Government has to legislate the servicing of those unprofitable areas, what's the point of privatising?

Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same.

There is no doubt there can be bloat when the government-run these entities, but we can learn from overseas how to manage these sorts of issues, like say Singapore.

But instead, we get told from one side of politics that the private sector can do it better but time and time again, in terms of service, that's proven to be wrong.

We know what they mean by "do it better" is actually making money.  Those services, and the people that use them (again, Power, Water, Health etc) become the commodity under these models.

Not only does the business model change from Service to Profit, but that profit comes by commoditising us and when things go wrong, because they're vital services and infrastructure, we have to pay a second time when our taxes are used to fix the problem/bail them out.

Gold Coast water was an example.  The local council had to buy back the company because costs were skyrocketing and service levels, repairs, started falling.  Water!

It should have never been privatised in the first place, but now we're left with a massive tax bill due to broken contacts that will be paid off for many many years to come.

I'm not flat out anti-privatisation, there are some use cases for it, but the notion that the private sector do it better and more efficiently and Government shouldn't run/own these entities, as a blanket statement I do not support.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 81413
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #12 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 12:34pm
 
Frank wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 10:56am:
National Security
Foreign investment is important for Australia’s long term economic success, stability and prosperity.
So our homegrowns are incompetent at it?


However, risks to Australia’s national interest, particularly national security, have increased as a result of developments including rapid technological change and changes in the international security environment.
Thus warranting that protections must be set in place.  There is a basic rule - remove the vague possibilities, then the remote probabilities, then the possibilities  - and you are left protecting against only the probable and the likely.  Interruption of energy is a high priority for any hostile group; transport may well be a remote possibility, but remove that and you lower the demand on your forces of protection.


The national security test provides the Treasurer with the ability to address new and emerging national security risks from foreign investment. The national security test:

requires mandatory notification of proposed investments in national security land, interests in exploration tenements over national security land, a proposed direct investment in a national security business or starting a new national security business;

allows investments that are not notified to be ‘called‑in’ for review on national security grounds;

allows investors who choose to voluntarily notify to receive certainty from being subject to ‘call‑in’; and

provides a last resort power, which, in exceptional circumstances, permits the Treasurer to impose conditions, vary existing conditions, or, as a last resort, require the divestment of any approved investment where national security risks emerge. This power is subject to a number of safeguards.
And you have absolute faith in a government structure that has proven it can be bought - Hong Darwin etc?  You actually TRUST government - which is historically and remains the greatest clear and present danger to security and stability and democracy?  Citing high-flown theory is fine - it is the bread on the bagel that counts.



https://firb.gov.au/national-security

Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 11592
Gender: male
Re: privatisation
Reply #13 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:00pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm:
Quote:
It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt.


That's not why they do it.


I am accusing you of nothing less than outright fraudulence, removing the topic of privatization from the MMT thread.

The current dysfunctional neoliberal economic system - including its current privatization ideology - is based on the current evil system of debt money issued by private financiers, all exposed on the MMT thread. 

And your removal of the reply function in your absurdly ideological post suggesting privatization is off topic on the MMT board, reveals much about the self-interested  nature of your  neoliberal economic orthodoxy, which you seem to think must be protected from an open and honest examination at all costs...

Get back to the MMT thread, and debate the issues, or be exposed as a fraud.   




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 11592
Gender: male
Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #14 - Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:02pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm:
For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.


Ideological BS.

Have the guts to debate the issues raised on the MMT thread. 

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/new

Your debt money system is a fraud, like you, who refused to  debate the issues re  IMF debt  crippling third world countries. 

Get back to the debate, or be exposed as a blind ideological fraud, at least until you restore the reply function on post #125,  on the MMT thread.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:15pm by thegreatdivide »  
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 41
Send Topic Print