XPost: soc.culture.baltics, soc.culture.czecho-slovak, soc.culture.russian   
   XPost: soc.culture.nordic, soc.culture.baltics   
   From: anton.usenet@gmail.com   
      
   David Friedman kirjoitti:   
   > In article ,   
   >  Anton  wrote:   
      
   >> David Friedman kirjoitti:   
   >>> In article   
   >>> ,   
   >>>  holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman) wrote:   
      
   >>> Yes. But the usual experience is that the socialist parts of capitalist   
   >>> societies don't work very well. That's one reason there has been a swing   
   >>> towards privatization in recent years.   
      
   >> Hmmm... could it be in some cases just the opposite: privatization of   
   >> public service didn't work out? British Railways, anyone?   
      
   >> Of course one could argue that stupid municipal authorities made a   
   >> shitty deal,   
      
   > One obvious problem is that "privatization" often means, not a shift to   
   > a free market system with the actual consumers deciding what they want   
   > to buy and what they are willing to pay, but only a shift to having a   
   > government organization hire a private firm to do something for it--with   
   > obvious possibilities for either incompetence or corruption the part of   
   > the hirer.   
      
   I agree with this view. It also proves public service is not a typical   
   open market sector where supply and demand, and price and value adjust   
   so that everything "naturally" falls into its place. Outsourcing puts   
   more burden and responsitibility to the citizen, the "end consumer" to   
   be alert of quality control and available options, and force them to   
   deal with not only the authorities, but also the company providing the   
   service. Three parties instead of two also gives more room to shift   
   responsibility around between the government and the company providing   
   the service, so they can play the blame game on each other instead of   
   doing something about the service.   
      
   Good thing that at least in Finland the open society is the vehicle to   
   best see to it that problems are recognized and dealth with.   
      
   I personally don't have any ideological attachment to these things.   
   Pragmatism is better than an absolute value of some 'ideology' to deal   
   with practical problems and challenges. USSR-style collectivization and   
   nationalization and a few equally ideologically driven 'privatization'   
   projects in the capitalist-world are the proof that ideology should not   
   be allowed to be an end in itself ahead of pragmatism.   
      
   --   
   Anton   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)