3 ms·
State owned enterprises is not a bad word. The idea of having state owned enterprises is easy, when there aren't much private investment in any country. State-o
by powerapple 6y ago
State owned enterprises is not a bad word. The idea of having state owned enterprises is easy, when there aren't much private investment in any country. State-owned enterprises can be a good choice, especially in capital-intense industry. The side effect of state-owned enterprises is that if the enterprises can lose competitiveness (or never gain), which means they are actually very weak when competing in domestic market. And normally the objective of state-owned enterprises in modern government is to support employment and economy. It is less about control. If I think about the future, when robots take over all jobs, people don't need to work for money, there will be either state-owned company distributing the profit amongst all citizens or company-owned state (i don't know how this is going to work)
- mochialex 6y agoIt is bad when the state is a totalitarian empire
- powerapple 6y agoWhy state-owned enterprises are bad in a totalitarian empire? I mean comparing to what?
- mochialex 6y agoIt does not need to be relative to anything to be “bad”. A state-owned company in a totalitarian empire is part of a system that suppresses freedom of speech, uses forced labour, conducts genocide, seeks to undermine democracy overseas. That’s why it’s bad.
- powerapple 6y agoNo. What you said has nothing to do with the state-owned enterprise. Is a piece of bread in your totalitarian empire bad? A state-owned enterprise provide employment, food and shelter for employees, and also provide social and economy functions for the general public.