+1

Two words: A4e, Olympics.

42

There are equally as many large scale public sector **** ups. Your point is moot.

It's not moot because I didn't contend that there weren't public sector ****ups. The point is that the government sub-contracting out to the private is fraught with problems.

Ironically, the problem is not the private sector, but the fact that the government tends not to have a similar level of sophistication and ends up getting screwed by it. PFI hospitals and schools come to mind.

Some services are simply better run in a public model. It may not always be as efficient as the private model, but since we aren't able to have private government (except in Alberta ) then public services can be the lesser of two evils.

Your problem is that you want the state to steal my money to pay for the things you want. We should have voluntary taxation - then if you want to pay for libraries and schools you can do so. I don't so I'll keep my cash.

Fair enough, but don't drive on any of my roads, and don't go to see any doctors that were educated in my schools!

A tad unrealistic...but almost inevitable I fear! I was hoping to keep this as objective and unemotive as possible....

- Roads can be paid for with voluntary taxation (i.e. petrol tax).
- I can pay for my own doctors with a voluntary taxation.
- Doctors can pay their own way through school.

Lads,....lads....!!

Yes getting a bit too serious without a at hand.

The problem with your philosophy is that public companies have a care of duty to their shareholders to maximise profit, which in practice means cutting corners in the name of efficiency and doing as little as possible to meet the contract requirements.

Public service providers have a care of duty to the people that they are serving. What happens when public services are tendered out is that the winning bidder tends to do the absolute bare minimum to meet the tender requirements, and the tenders tend to not be well drafted and dont cover every single eventuality, so the net result in many cases is an erosion of services compared to the way the public sector provides the service.

There are some things that should never be left to market forces. Market forces tend not to be very good at touchy feely sociological stuff.

There's a very good model for private organizations doing stuff not for profit. Charities do perfectly fine. People can choose to donate or not rather than be forced into paying at gunpoint.

The problem is that many of the things that a decent humanitarian society should be paying for are not as easy to fund raise for as baby pandas or sick kids in the chemo ward, so charity works for some things, but not others.

Who's going to pay for the prison service for example. Private firms have a woeful record in that area and its just one of many.

Most charities have to resort to chugging. I wouldn't particularly want to see that method of raising funds used on a wider scale.