5 ms·

I think the problem is that all three sectors that you cite, health care, higher education and prison system, there is no free market but they are oligopols whe

by fxj 8y ago

I think the problem is that all three sectors that you cite, health care, higher education and prison system, there is no free market but they are oligopols where only a small number of big players can lever their weight and keep others out.

CraigJPerry 8y ago
Is that not just a "no true Scotsman" argument? "there is no free market but they are oligopols" There used to be 12 private prison companies in 2000 but it appears there are only 3 now. The start of the journey was privatization of prisons. This is where that path has currently led. It is what it is, ergo free market didn't work?
- SeanDav 8y ago
  Even in free markets, Oligarchies and Monopolies are a thing. No system is perfect - potential lack of competition in niche areas is one of the weaknesses of a free market system.
  - benj111 8y ago
    Agreed. But we choose a free market or whatever because we believe it will produce the best outcome. If it doesn't work as envisioned then we can either tweak it until it does work, or throw it out and start again, the worst option is to leave it alone, especially as we know it works elsewhere. There seems to be a view that free market v socialism is a binary choice. Its a continuum, and both pure socialism and pure free market are equally bad. No country follows either path 100%.
- wallace_f 8y ago
  The problem is private prisons openly lobby, and secretly collude, with the government to increase their profits. This is also why insulin is expensive (the discoverers and patent holders made their patents freely available long ago). It's regulations which keep insulin, and other drugs, protected from competition and therefore can be expensive... Really, there are endless stories about this. The gov vs private debate is kind of academic when the reality is a lot of the problem comes down to collusion and cheating from both of them.
  - f-securus 8y ago
    The problem with private prisons is they have a conflict of interest. Do they work to improve the lives of the incarcerated and lower recidivism? No! That would lower their bottom line as they get paid per person.
    - wallace_f 8y ago
      That's a market failure. I'm not pro-privatization of prisons.
  - europsucks 8y ago
    It is fine if entities try to increase profits. Usually competition is the way to insure fair prices. The collusion then might be to not allow competition. In the case of pharmacy, for example, I would guess there are many regulations that make it very expensive or infeasible to start a competing firm.
- CaptainZapp 8y ago
  Why are there private prison companies to begin with? There are, in my opinion, certain aspects of government, which never should be outsourced for private gain. A prison company being one of the most extreme examples.
  - inapis 8y ago
    As a non-American this boggles my mind too. Certain things are not meant for the private sector.
  - europsucks 8y ago
    Why exactly, though? If other companies can satisfy the needs of the state, why not prisons? You wouldn't mandate that governments should build their own cars, for example?
    - CaptainZapp 8y ago
      Monopoly on violence [1] is held by the state as it should be, otherwise we have vigilante justice and I think we can all agree that's bad. In my opinion (and we can certainly debate this point) this should never be outsourced to third party entities. A rent-a-cop in a mall should not have the power to arrest customers (or even search their belongings) without calling the cops. Outsourcing such functions have the inherent risk that the privat company cuts costs and corners and moreover hires unqualified and cheap staff, which makes a bad situation even worse. Incarceration of a human being should never, ever be a license to aply additional torture in any way, shape or form. Private law enforcment with minimal oversight is a direct route to such excesses, which should not be tolerated by a civilized society. You wouldn't mandate that governments should build their own cars, for example? That's a rather silly analogy, don't you think? Consumer products usually don't violently intrude into the freedom and bodily integrity of other people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence edit : added link
      - fireant 8y ago
        US has been glorifying violent vigilantes in popular media for at least 50 years. Vigilante superhero movies are one of the most selling every year.
- europsucks 8y ago
  Arguably there is only one customer - the government. So maybe it is impossible in this case to create a free market.

by fxj 8y ago

CraigJPerry 8y ago

Is that not just a "no true Scotsman" argument? "there is no free market but they are oligopols" There used to be 12 private prison companies in 2000 but it appears there are only 3 now. The start of the journey was privatization of prisons. This is where that path has currently led. It is what it is, ergo free market didn't work?

SeanDav 8y ago
Even in free markets, Oligarchies and Monopolies are a thing. No system is perfect - potential lack of competition in niche areas is one of the weaknesses of a free market system.
- benj111 8y ago
  Agreed. But we choose a free market or whatever because we believe it will produce the best outcome. If it doesn't work as envisioned then we can either tweak it until it does work, or throw it out and start again, the worst option is to leave it alone, especially as we know it works elsewhere. There seems to be a view that free market v socialism is a binary choice. Its a continuum, and both pure socialism and pure free market are equally bad. No country follows either path 100%.
wallace_f 8y ago
The problem is private prisons openly lobby, and secretly collude, with the government to increase their profits. This is also why insulin is expensive (the discoverers and patent holders made their patents freely available long ago). It's regulations which keep insulin, and other drugs, protected from competition and therefore can be expensive... Really, there are endless stories about this. The gov vs private debate is kind of academic when the reality is a lot of the problem comes down to collusion and cheating from both of them.
- f-securus 8y ago
  The problem with private prisons is they have a conflict of interest. Do they work to improve the lives of the incarcerated and lower recidivism? No! That would lower their bottom line as they get paid per person.
  - wallace_f 8y ago
    That's a market failure. I'm not pro-privatization of prisons.
- europsucks 8y ago
  It is fine if entities try to increase profits. Usually competition is the way to insure fair prices. The collusion then might be to not allow competition. In the case of pharmacy, for example, I would guess there are many regulations that make it very expensive or infeasible to start a competing firm.
CaptainZapp 8y ago
Why are there private prison companies to begin with? There are, in my opinion, certain aspects of government, which never should be outsourced for private gain. A prison company being one of the most extreme examples.
- inapis 8y ago
  As a non-American this boggles my mind too. Certain things are not meant for the private sector.
- europsucks 8y ago
  Why exactly, though? If other companies can satisfy the needs of the state, why not prisons? You wouldn't mandate that governments should build their own cars, for example?
  - CaptainZapp 8y ago
    Monopoly on violence [1] is held by the state as it should be, otherwise we have vigilante justice and I think we can all agree that's bad. In my opinion (and we can certainly debate this point) this should never be outsourced to third party entities. A rent-a-cop in a mall should not have the power to arrest customers (or even search their belongings) without calling the cops. Outsourcing such functions have the inherent risk that the privat company cuts costs and corners and moreover hires unqualified and cheap staff, which makes a bad situation even worse. Incarceration of a human being should never, ever be a license to aply additional torture in any way, shape or form. Private law enforcment with minimal oversight is a direct route to such excesses, which should not be tolerated by a civilized society. You wouldn't mandate that governments should build their own cars, for example? That's a rather silly analogy, don't you think? Consumer products usually don't violently intrude into the freedom and bodily integrity of other people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence edit : added link
    - fireant 8y ago
      US has been glorifying violent vigilantes in popular media for at least 50 years. Vigilante superhero movies are one of the most selling every year.
europsucks 8y ago
Arguably there is only one customer - the government. So maybe it is impossible in this case to create a free market.