3 ms·

If you look to Bernie's wonderworld, Norway (where I'm from), all that is taken care of privately. However the credit and debt registry companies are obliged by

by kebman 7y ago

If you look to Bernie's wonderworld, Norway (where I'm from), all that is taken care of privately. However the credit and debt registry companies are obliged by law to inform customers when a check-up is done on them. It's quite painless, and it's a service completely paid for by the finance industry, instead of being a poorly run and corruption prone state owned and agency financed by tax money. The debt registry can perhaps become a nuiscance to a small subset of bank customers, but only those who take on added risk by loading up on big loans and credit lines at many different institutions.

nickthemagicman 7y ago
Why aren't private corporations corruption prone? They're the ones DOING the corrupting! But somehow we feel they're better than government? Every 'appropriately funded' govt service I've used has been miles away better than the equivalent private service. Schools, hospitals, research facilities, police, student loan management company etc etc
- kebman 7y ago
  Oh, they are, of course, like anyone else. But they have directly paying clients to please, and thus they have a much more important reputation to keep. If any foul play is caught, they stand to lose business, and thus money, while political slights might only cause the odd head or two to roll. And so, barring the bad apple or two, it tends to happen less often as long as the conditions for competition are fair. On the other hand, a state-owned agency is often very bureaucratic, and thus it has built-in deficiensies and resource hungry regulatives that slow things down to a crawl. All that does is to incentivice paying for speed, which would of course be corruption. On top of that, private companies aren't subject to change every time Government changes, and leadership change within the private sector tend to be efficiency / profit centered, while Government change is much more complex, and often based on quaint special interests that need to be politically pleased. Or the bar is set higher for it to happen, because politically changing the policies of private companies would involves actual laws that need to be voted in, rather than departmentally set regulatives.
- remarkEon 7y ago
  >Every 'appropriately funded' govt service I've used has been miles away better than the equivalent private service... Strange because my experience has been the exact opposite in every case, with the exception of police - and that's only because I don't have an immediate proxy. That private industry provides alternatives to these public goods and does them better is an indictment of the competence of our government, and shouldn't be viewed as an endorsement or evidence in favor of free markets for everything. These markets emerge because of government incompetence, not because of corruption or because the market is inherently "better".
  - nickthemagicman 7y ago
    I disagree with 100% of what you've said here.
    - remarkEon 7y ago
      Great. I also think that Houston will win the World Series again (sorry, LA).

by kebman 7y ago

nickthemagicman 7y ago

Why aren't private corporations corruption prone? They're the ones DOING the corrupting! But somehow we feel they're better than government? Every 'appropriately funded' govt service I've used has been miles away better than the equivalent private service. Schools, hospitals, research facilities, police, student loan management company etc etc

kebman 7y ago
Oh, they are, of course, like anyone else. But they have directly paying clients to please, and thus they have a much more important reputation to keep. If any foul play is caught, they stand to lose business, and thus money, while political slights might only cause the odd head or two to roll. And so, barring the bad apple or two, it tends to happen less often as long as the conditions for competition are fair. On the other hand, a state-owned agency is often very bureaucratic, and thus it has built-in deficiensies and resource hungry regulatives that slow things down to a crawl. All that does is to incentivice paying for speed, which would of course be corruption. On top of that, private companies aren't subject to change every time Government changes, and leadership change within the private sector tend to be efficiency / profit centered, while Government change is much more complex, and often based on quaint special interests that need to be politically pleased. Or the bar is set higher for it to happen, because politically changing the policies of private companies would involves actual laws that need to be voted in, rather than departmentally set regulatives.
remarkEon 7y ago
>Every 'appropriately funded' govt service I've used has been miles away better than the equivalent private service... Strange because my experience has been the exact opposite in every case, with the exception of police - and that's only because I don't have an immediate proxy. That private industry provides alternatives to these public goods and does them better is an indictment of the competence of our government, and shouldn't be viewed as an endorsement or evidence in favor of free markets for everything. These markets emerge because of government incompetence, not because of corruption or because the market is inherently "better".
- nickthemagicman 7y ago
  I disagree with 100% of what you've said here.
  - remarkEon 7y ago
    Great. I also think that Houston will win the World Series again (sorry, LA).