rhino: Privatizing water discussion
I wish to offer support for the privatization of Water districts, but only if it is truly a sincere privatization effort where the resources go to the highest bidder and not the ones that have bought access into the local government.
As an example, I offer you my city, Cincinnati.
Today the city manager posted this video to explain his efforts ...
http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/noncms/cmgr/media/water_distric...
While I am skeptical that this plan is truly a privatization plan, if it were, I would support it. As it stands now, I am opposed to the plan.
One thing that the city manager did not mention is that Cincinnati is the only municipality in the country that actually owns a rail line. I think it goes all the way to Georgia. I would bet that the hidden part of the plan is to lease this land to the local water district to bury a water main that can carry water all the way to Atlanta.
If you truly want a low cost, efficient system for getting water to everyone, privatization is the way to go as long as it is a truly competitive, free market scheme to privatize.
As it stands now, governments through out the world are going to simply whore it out to their buddies.
As it stands right now ....
Because of the public nature of the water district the district is restricted to serving residents only.
If the water district was privatized, it could build a pipeline to Atlanta.
The idea is to expand the logistical potential of local water sources.
Why would this not be a net benefit to society?
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
rhino: Because who-ever buys it will likely be a
welfarist corporation.
Also, "owing to costs" they might have to deviate from their plans -- un-forseen. This always happens on projects like this.
I'd be concerned if the pipeline starts in your county and goes to Atlanta that your water is being sold off -- with the cost of building falling in large part in tax payers lap.
But to answer your question reflectively; "why would this not be a net benefit to society?" it could be -- Sometimes a centralized gov't gets it right; forces the right change.
I can only think of two instances; however. #1 During a time of Righteous War (have we ever had one?) and #2 the Highway and Interstate Freeway Systems
Yes yes -- I know they can be privatized now; however, there was no movement to build such a massive network in the free-market (at that time). If that was the only bit of debt Gov't created none of us would be complaining.
The question is "when" was the tipping point -- when should they have stopped and made it private.
Getting it going was righteous in my estimation; obviously, it could of been started then handed over to private interests (immediately).
35 Years and 110+ billion dollars -- $600B in todays dollars. Originally I think it was forecasted at $14B. Yeah, there was a point where it should have been handed over to private interests, hahaha.
.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I get all that and I agree with most of what you said ...
I disagree that the interstate highway system was a net good.
But ...
This is a movement in the right direction.
Dr. Paul votes for bills that are a net tax cut and net negative government expenditure. And he will vote for it saying, "This doesn't go far enough, but it is a step in the right direction."
How we get there is the great debate.
That is why the Libertarians are so mixed with their opinion of Dr. Paul.
He thinks we can get there by using the existing system.
They do not.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
RP knows we can get there with the US Constitution
The US Constitution was rendered into a GD piece of paper by Bush, so the new system, this UN Angenda 21, is the system the US is trying to implement by destroying the US Constitution through democracy and installing corporatism... the NWO.
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
Do you think we can get there using the existing system?
.
RP is fighting "the good fight" -- however
his "real" role (and he knows it) is being a living-public-educator -AND- drawing peoples minds towards Misesian Logic.
He never says "Rothbard" does he? He always quotes Mises.
If HR 1207 were to pass - it would be the first bill he ever wrote that passed (as far as my recollection goes); that's not an accident.
He writes those bills as Historical education pieces.
We are too close to RP (living in this age) to understand the magnitude of his righteousness or goodness.
If a politician were ever to be cannonized it will be Ron Paul -- the single greatest American politician to ever fight for Liberty.
Now that being said -- the "real" road to liberty lies in Counter-Economics.
Even Mises said that the essence of C-E (as I spell it out) is how we'd live in a free-society -- therefore if we want a free-society we can use it as a model to get their.
Whatever maintains a free-society is what takes you into a free-society.
That might be the only political "law" (as in scientific truth) that is also an actionable plan, smile.
Counter-Economics (C-E) -- Consumer-Minarchism (eventually becoming Mises Consumer-Individualism): Practiced by 10M
1) Buy Only (as much as possible) Local Products and Services
2) Hire Under-the-Table (as much as possible)
3) Work Under-the-Table (as much as possible -- more and more)
4) Buy Organic and Free-Range Produce and Meat
5) Get rid of all big assets: Houses, Cars, RVs -- anything they could leverage against you
6) Get rid of all debt funded assets: stocks, bonds, CD's, mutual funds
7) Buy precious metal and bury it (no record of it)
8) Start a seed bank (produce - grains - fruit - marijuana)
9) Rent or Lease everything (until gov't is toppled)
10) At this point declare bankruptcy on all remaining debt (C-E's never use credit again) -- think of this effect, simultaneous large-scale bankruptcy!
11) On products/services you can't get local -- form a consumer union and organize a "serious" no-dollar-vote day. Then go to the corporation in question and say, "stop lobbying or we stop buying" -- at this point switch to an alternative product (and threaten that organization -- "quit lobbying or we go back").
12) Never Vote or Lobby again
There's more but you get the idea.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
(self-edit)
Moved comment to Octobox's "Are we nationals" thread.
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/112010#comment-1218558
As much as I agreed with your previous post ...
I whole heartedly disagree with this one.
The only way to achieve freedom is to get people to choose freedom.
And the only way to do that is in the market place of ideas.
C E will get you no where except increase victimhood.
I should be able to spend my fortune as I see fit.
Of course I do most of what you say above, but others may not.
They are not less of a freedom lover because of this.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
Medical marijuana represents freedom
and it is a currancy. MSM claims it's a $14 Billion industry, and it indeed has freed many people from corporatization. There are a number of "wooden nickels" to collect, trade, and share among local businesses.
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
rhino: That's a mighty fan you are waving ;-)
Too dismiss C-E (Counter-Economics) which according to Mises is how you maintain a free-society as a vehicle to get us there.
People have the right to spend their FRNs as they see fit -- that's correct.
No one said they "had to" practice C-E.
I disagree with you: The ARE less of a freedom lover -IF- they do not understand how to maintain liberty in a free-society.
Ignorance is not Bliss -- It's Folly.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I would speculate that Dr. Paul also ...
disagrees with that.
There is only one policy shift that Dr. Paul has argued for since his first term in office.
The return of the Gold Standard.
He thinks we can get there by this single policy shift.
I agree to a point.
We can achieve true freedom over time by such a policy, but we also must wake people up and get them one at a time to choose freedom and to sell their ideals to their kids and grand kids.
The individual mind is the key to success of freedom.
That means we must for all of time, continue to engage the individual, not sell policy.
Sell ideas, not law.
Sell objectivism, not collectivism.
Sell self interest, not the greater good.
That is the true path to freedom.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
Rhino: I don't disagree with what you said (you made my point)
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I do. It is our destiny to be free.
And I would argue that the only way of actually gaining freedom is to win in the market place of ideas without the threat of violence on our part.
That would require working within the current system and slowly moving toward freedom.
All other options require violence.
That is my two cents.
Take it for what it's worth.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
Perhaps there is no one right answer.
One value in localized control is that the world would be a laboratory of experimentation; just as America became an example of prosperity during its relatively free years, we would discover what works best for allocation/control/distribution/guardianship/whatever of natural resources necessary to life by seeing many approaches tried.
And in differing cultures there probably would be differing systems that would work best. What does not work is centralized control.
reedr3v: Well said
"What does not work is centralized control."
Not in the medium to long-run.
If we had a centralized gov't made of perfect and altruistic all-knowing beings that could think and act at real-time speeds -- then yes in that case it could work.
Since that is not possible given our present technology or ethical development then no -- as you said, "centralized gov't does not work"
hahahaha.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Rhino: You can't Privatize in a Corporatist Enviroment
We are all Welfarist in America.
What we can do is wade through the Bog of Corporatism towards Freedom, but we are in the funk (each one of us).
Even the Counter-Economics model I propose benefits "the machine" -- it's just that it benefits the machine at such a small percentage that it's choking it to death.
If 10M practiced Counter-Economics given the weakness of the Banking system -- We'd have our Free-Society.
However, if people do not understand the "evils" of Capitalism and the "evils" of Marxism then we will "reset" at Zero (liberty) and start another cyclical march toward Corporatism.
Rothbardianism is the latter to a "T" -- A reset to Zero then a slow march toward Corporaism.
The "evil" is Voting and Lobbying -- Rights Seeking
There must be ZERO Rights for Workers and Owners
-----That resets the system to Zero and marches towards Ever-New Liberty
Meditate on Consumer-Individualism from a transitionary Consumer-Minarchism and read more Mises.
Consumer's Rights are Perfect/True/Un-Breakable when Workers and Owners have Zero Voting and Zero Lobbying Opportunity.
To have that you must have a transitionary Meritocracy with severly minimal oversight -- With an easy to follow Consitution:
----1 Central Meritocracy Controls Navy
----50 State Level Meritocracies to Control State Army and State Air Guard
----1 Central "temporary" Meritocracy Controls Paying off Foreign Debt
----The ZEROs: ZERO Regulatory Authority, ZERO Tax Authority, ZERO Moneytary Authority, ZERO Court Authority....
----One 6-year Term
----Hired by 1 Team of "Experts" based on b-plan presentation / innovation strategies
----Paid by another Team of "Experts" based on achieved and stated goals
----Navy Meritocracy gets 1% National Sales Tax (as budget and remainder to be earned by incentive based rubric)
----State Meritocracies get 3% State Sales Tax (as budget and remainder to be earned by incentive based rubric)
----Debt Meritocracy gets 3% National Sales Tax (budget and salary is similarly paid)
----Taxes are paid at the point-of-sail and transferred instantly to State or Central Meritocracy.
----7% Total Tax on each Consumer -- No Taxes on Owners or Workers
----Each Meritocracy is a 24-member Team (they can hire as many staffers as they like - the more they hire the more they must share of their incentives).
----The Hiring is made open-to-the-public and so is the rubric review to pay incentives.
----The Hiring and Incentive Teams are selected "experts" (randomly) and come from a voluntary pool -- they are un-paid. Their decisions are made public and in open-source (for debate).
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Octobox thinking outside of the box again,
I love it.
It could probably only work
It could probably only work in either an anarcho-capitalist world government or a world where gold standards are predominant, because of this scenario:
A: Corporations buy water
B: Governments buy corporations with printed money
Ventura 2012
Yes.
Privatize it. No brainer.
You need to rethink how privatization has worked in other areas.
"Human beings with love and compassion are some of the most beautiful creatures in the universe... Those without are a plague on us all."
"Human beings with love and compassion are some of the most beautiful creatures in the universe... Those without are a plague on us all."
Of course it should be privatized
Socialists oppose private ownership of the means of production, not free market capitalists.
O.K. ... for the thinkers that are already down my path ...
How do you successfully convert a publicly held utility to a truly privatized market.
The attempt with communications failed, we now have corporate whores in this field.
We can say the same thing for energy, transportation, and in the more distant path financial institutions.
Carry on.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
I''m thinkin'
maybe start by taking some steps on the 20,000 mile journey toward a partially free market first.
Transferring control of the Earth's water supply, over to Monsanto, probably isn't the way to take the baby steps.
Perhaps,trying to find or start some form of free market first, so there's some kind of "free market" to transfer it to, might be a good first step.
Going on the idea, of course, that in order to transfer something to a free market, there must be a free market to transfer it to.
Big T makes a good point here
"Transferring control of the Earth's water supply, over to Monsanto, probably isn't the way to take the baby steps."
Going with the highest bidder who might be a Corporatist Organization -- is the same as transferring the rights of the water from the people using the people's money (inflation - debt).
Robbing Peter to Pay Paul -- Benefiting the Tax Payer by Robbing the Tax Payer to Benefit the Corporation does not sound Sound.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Maybe like the money supply
legalize things such as rain barrels, in many states so that private individuals could sell or give away water? Maybe bottled water is kind of a step in that direction although some does come from public sources.
"In the capitalist society there is a place and bread for all. Its ability to expand provides sustenance for every worker. Permanent unemployment is not a feature of free capitalism." - Mises - www.mises.org
"Endless money forms the sinews of war." - Cicero, www.freedomshift.blogspot.com
Absolutely, I agree ...
In fact, in my city, all gutters must be connected to a downspout that must connect to the metropolitan sewer district main line.
Any violation can be criminally prosecuted.
I completely agree with your arguement.
Well stated.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
It would be illegal
There have been a number of fights by people who try to overturn the law when water becomes privatized and rainbarrels become illegal, you are stopping production by collecting water for your selfish needs when water is OWNED by a corporation. http://www.groovygreen.com/groove/?p=3135
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
I don't think it matters too much.
I don't care whether it's sold to the highest bidder or just given away to a friend of a politician. At least it's put into the private sector where it belongs. Simply giving it away may even be preferable because it denies the government of income. We don't want money transferred out of the private sector into the government sector either. Perhaps a free lottery would be ideal.
*Clutching chest like Fred Sanford on 'Sanford and Son'...*
Dude, are you serious?
Do you hate it that much that there is something left in this world that is out of the control of your beloved fictitious corporate persons?
If a corporation delivers bad drinking water
its stock price will suffer. Either it will go out of business or they'll have to provide better quality water.
If a government delivers bad water, it much more difficult to get them to change. If government is controlling all the water then there are no competitors to turn to either.
I don't see any reason to trust government more than a business that's operating for a profit, whose profit depends on consumer satisfaction. Government doesn't have to provide quality, because they have the power to tax.