5 ms·

I will point out that in Canada, many of our telecoms were run by privately operated, publicly owned organizations (Crown Corporations) that operated at arms le

by ygjb 5y ago

I will point out that in Canada, many of our telecoms were run by privately operated, publicly owned organizations (Crown Corporations) that operated at arms length. Until they were sold for pennies on the dollar by governments looking to score a quick win for "fiscal responsibility" and "small government", these organizations operated with a high degree of public scrutiny, and had the goal of offering low cost, reliable services. By most accounts the quality of service in relation to the price has been awful in most places in Canada, and the few places that still have Crown Corp delivered telecoms are among the happiest customers in that sector. This same scenario has played out across multiple sectors including oil & gas, electricity and hydroelectric services, and here in BC, transportation services (BC Ferries). Everyone likes to take a dump on public run services, but practically speaking, they have more oversight and accountability than privately run services.

scarface74 5y ago
So just imagine what happens when the government controls the communications. What happens when “they” get into power and start censoring and controlling communications that you don’t agree with? In this case “they” are the party with policies that you don’t agree with. There was a study in the US that the government fails to pass policies that 80%+ of the population agrees with. One easy example is making cannabis legal federally. People who vote Republican and Democrat both support it by an overwhelming majority. But it couldn’t pass.
- ygjb 5y ago
  Some of us still live in functioning democracies. Also, it's worth pointing out that relying on privately owned or publicly traded corporations is not an effective strategy for preserving freedom; those businesses will only do that as long as they can justify it to their shareholders (private or public), and are subject to whatever laws apply in the jurisdictions they reside in (kind of the reason alot of 'western' companies prefer to either not do business, or conduct business via arms length entities in countries like Russia, China, and other places).
  - scarface74 5y ago
    So the US has the highest incarceration rate of any western country. The police routinely stop and harass minorities for no other reason than the color of their skin, the judicial system routinely hands out harsher punishment for the same crime when the defendant is minority, etc. Even when you take race out of the equation, when you look at the congressional make up in the US and compare it to the party more people actually voted for, it’s just the opposite. The last president didn’t win the popular vote. Private corporations don’t have the power of the state to coerce me to do anything. The government does. Why would I want to give the government more power? We see both dudes trying to control communications. Apple is definitely not working with China at arms length. Neither is Microsoft. Google still makes the little hardware it does in China. As far as functioning government you mean Europe where laws were passed like the GDPR that only led to cookie warnings on every web page?
    - ygjb 5y ago
      I don't know what to tell you. The people of the United States have continuously ceded power to their government, and the corporations that wield influence over it, while being spoonfed lies about what freedom actually means by government and media. The right to bear arms supercedes the right to live in safe communities (and as a former infantry man, I can assert that more weapons in the hands of untrained civilians does not make communities more safe). The right to an health care (abortion) is superceded by so called "religious freedoms". The right to vote is superceded by politicians who rewrite election laws and electoral districts to choose their constituents. Freedom to discriminate is beginning to supercede the right to freedom from discrimination. These problems aren't unique to the United States, and in Canada we have our own issues. > Private corporations don’t have the power of the state to coerce me to do anything. * blinks in private law enforcement, the radical expansion of surveillance by private corporations, and lack of accountability of tech companies * Uh, yeah, that's by design, but on a global basis, the design is breaking. There are more and more exceptionally wealthy individuals and corporations that are wielding power and working in domains that have typically been the purview of states and governments. We need stronger regulation of corporations globally, and strong treaties that unify global regulation and information sharing of how that regulation occurs, or we will continue to cede freedom and governance to the whims of corporations that will wield significant influence over elected officials. One thing going for unelected government, they generally DGAF about the whims of corporations, and we have seen what some countries are willing to do in order to preserve influence over corporations (I would love to hear an honest, unbiased tell all from Jack Ma for example).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
b112 5y ago
FYI, corps like Bell Canada, Telus, BCttel were not government owned, department or crown corp. They were just highly protected by government regulation. The only ones allowed to do certain things, along with mandated Canadian ownership requirements. They had a defacto monopoly.
- ygjb 5y ago
  Yeah, I am talking about Crown Corporations like MTS, Petro-Canada, BC Ferries, and such that were taken private, not the telecoms protectionism that is currently screwing over consumers in Canada, they are quite different. I don't object to open markets, but I also think there is a space for crown corporations with a mandate to operate competitively (which strong oversight) for the benefit of Canadians (or citizens of $your_nation)
  - b112 5y ago
    There is. I found Petro Canada to be a fascinating use case too. Inject yourself into an absurd market, with price fixing, to force competition. And in the long term, it profited us quite well, including as we sold it off.

by ygjb 5y ago

scarface74 5y ago

So just imagine what happens when the government controls the communications. What happens when “they” get into power and start censoring and controlling communications that you don’t agree with? In this case “they” are the party with policies that you don’t agree with. There was a study in the US that the government fails to pass policies that 80%+ of the population agrees with. One easy example is making cannabis legal federally. People who vote Republican and Democrat both support it by an overwhelming majority. But it couldn’t pass.

ygjb 5y ago
Some of us still live in functioning democracies. Also, it's worth pointing out that relying on privately owned or publicly traded corporations is not an effective strategy for preserving freedom; those businesses will only do that as long as they can justify it to their shareholders (private or public), and are subject to whatever laws apply in the jurisdictions they reside in (kind of the reason alot of 'western' companies prefer to either not do business, or conduct business via arms length entities in countries like Russia, China, and other places).
- scarface74 5y ago
  So the US has the highest incarceration rate of any western country. The police routinely stop and harass minorities for no other reason than the color of their skin, the judicial system routinely hands out harsher punishment for the same crime when the defendant is minority, etc. Even when you take race out of the equation, when you look at the congressional make up in the US and compare it to the party more people actually voted for, it’s just the opposite. The last president didn’t win the popular vote. Private corporations don’t have the power of the state to coerce me to do anything. The government does. Why would I want to give the government more power? We see both dudes trying to control communications. Apple is definitely not working with China at arms length. Neither is Microsoft. Google still makes the little hardware it does in China. As far as functioning government you mean Europe where laws were passed like the GDPR that only led to cookie warnings on every web page?
  - ygjb 5y ago
    I don't know what to tell you. The people of the United States have continuously ceded power to their government, and the corporations that wield influence over it, while being spoonfed lies about what freedom actually means by government and media. The right to bear arms supercedes the right to live in safe communities (and as a former infantry man, I can assert that more weapons in the hands of untrained civilians does not make communities more safe). The right to an health care (abortion) is superceded by so called "religious freedoms". The right to vote is superceded by politicians who rewrite election laws and electoral districts to choose their constituents. Freedom to discriminate is beginning to supercede the right to freedom from discrimination. These problems aren't unique to the United States, and in Canada we have our own issues. > Private corporations don’t have the power of the state to coerce me to do anything. * blinks in private law enforcement, the radical expansion of surveillance by private corporations, and lack of accountability of tech companies * Uh, yeah, that's by design, but on a global basis, the design is breaking. There are more and more exceptionally wealthy individuals and corporations that are wielding power and working in domains that have typically been the purview of states and governments. We need stronger regulation of corporations globally, and strong treaties that unify global regulation and information sharing of how that regulation occurs, or we will continue to cede freedom and governance to the whims of corporations that will wield significant influence over elected officials. One thing going for unelected government, they generally DGAF about the whims of corporations, and we have seen what some countries are willing to do in order to preserve influence over corporations (I would love to hear an honest, unbiased tell all from Jack Ma for example).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

b112 5y ago

FYI, corps like Bell Canada, Telus, BCttel were not government owned, department or crown corp. They were just highly protected by government regulation. The only ones allowed to do certain things, along with mandated Canadian ownership requirements. They had a defacto monopoly.

ygjb 5y ago
Yeah, I am talking about Crown Corporations like MTS, Petro-Canada, BC Ferries, and such that were taken private, not the telecoms protectionism that is currently screwing over consumers in Canada, they are quite different. I don't object to open markets, but I also think there is a space for crown corporations with a mandate to operate competitively (which strong oversight) for the benefit of Canadians (or citizens of $your_nation)
- b112 5y ago
  There is. I found Petro Canada to be a fascinating use case too. Inject yourself into an absurd market, with price fixing, to force competition. And in the long term, it profited us quite well, including as we sold it off.