NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/epaper/2005/04/21/m1a_wx_0421.html
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2005/february/bankruptcy_study_hig.php
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p001254.html

After reading this and having a conversation like this:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=413567

I would really like to know why people consider private systems better than publicly-run (ie government-run) systems.

(Personally, I think crappy business-toadying public departments in the US are what create the negative portrayal of government services in the US. That, and the barrage of negativity the lobbyists portray in the Amercan media.)

Well, that is a difficult question.

I know one argument supporting the public sector and that is that in Britain, under the Conservatives, the function of cleaning NHS hospitals was a responsibility given to private companies. What happened?

Well, hospitals slowly but surely began to degrade in terms of cleanliness and that has allowed the spread of certain diseases like MRSA (though cleanliness has nothing to do with the cause of such a disease, that responsibility lies with the overuse of antibiotics by doctors).

When presented with a choice between government and private run business plans, I always have to ask myself:

Do I really want the same people who brought me the DMV to run my energy company/hospital/trash collection?

And I have to ask myself:

Do I really want the same people who brought me Wal-Mart to handle my army/roads/schools?

And I have to ask myself:

Do I really want the same people who brought me Wal-Mart to handle my army/roads/schools?

If the choice was between Wal-Mart and the DMV, hell yes I would want Wal-Mart.

Have fun with the Smiley Youth and the paying in excess of what you spend on your petrol bill - in addition to it - just to get to work, then.

(I've actually had mostly good experiences with the DMV. Wal-mart not so much. I'm guessing you can tell?)

I would really like to know why people consider private systems better than publicly-run (ie government-run) systems.


Because their experience with the public sector has been really bad and they think thats how it has to be. They dont stop to ask themselves why and how that can be fixed, they just assume public = slow monolithic bureaucracy by default.

tag

Where's the poll? :D

Both has their advantages and disadvantages. Actually it really has to be who can run it better.

If the choice was between Wal-Mart and the DMV, hell yes I would want Wal-Mart.
In Private sector bad service can get you fired, In Government it can't, in fact it is encouraged ;)

In Private sector bad service can get you fired, In Government it can't, in fact it is encouraged ;)
Thats not true. A President can be impeached for inapropriate behavior. A 911 reciptionist can be fired for saying something mean to their caller. :)

If the choice was between Wal-Mart and the DMV, hell yes I would want Wal-Mart.
Your absolutely right.

In Private sector bad service can get you fired, In Government it can't, in fact it is encouraged ;)

Sounds like CitySnail to a tee. :rolleyes:

Ah privatisation, I love it. Cus one day I hope to own a privatised company.

As far as weather service goes; they have really not made the case that government safety would be improved by limiting public reporting to disasters only. The weather needs constant monitoring, so it is either do it or don't, no half-way. If the private companies can demonstrate that they add value then they can be profitable. If not then they are relegated to the same status as private roads, private mail and private security. Some services are best suited to public function with the private sector filling in niches.

As far as health insurance goes there is already a vast public sector for the poor, medicare. As most people know it is doing a piss-poor job. They pay slow and only partial amounts. Many providors will not take patients covered by medicare for this reason. meanwhile it is much more expensive than private insurance. Private insurance also has its flaws as the emphasis is often reduced from patient care to cost. However the private sector is doing a vastly superior job in providing service than the public sector can. The trick is making the private sector accessible to everyone.

I personlally think HMOs have to carry a part of the blame. Patients no longer care about cost at $20 flat rate per visit regardless of actual cost, ending the best benefit of private services - competitive pricing. If both parties were on the same page - such as with a 20% deductible with an annual cap (to prevent catastrophic illness/injury costs from getting out of hand) this would work to restore competitive pricing to healthcare. It would get insurance companies out of the price/service negtiation business and put the consumer in charge of their healthcare. It would result in a tremendous drop in the cost of insurance as consumers returned to pricing/service decisions in their healthcare consumption. I think ending HMOs would do much to improve the healthcare system.

As far as healthcare for the poor - medicare does a piss-poor job. I say give them vouchers for private insurance. It would cost the government much less than administering their own health insurance and improve the payout ratio/time to providors. In otherwords - similar to handing out foodstamps instead of creating their own chain of grocery stores for the poor.

However the private sector is doing a vastly superior job in providing service than the public sector can.


That statement is completely inaccurate. The statement should read:

The private sector in the US is doing a vastly superior job in providing service than the public sector is.

There is a big difference between the two statements. Your statement illogically assumes that there is no way to fix the problems the public sector in the US has, despite the fact that other countries are successful in doing so. It also makes it seem like this is a global problem, which it is not. Some countries have efficient public sectors, some do not. The US is one of those that does not.