At the risk is saying the obvious, I want to talk about private versus public - again.
There is so much bs going on in politics about the alleged evils of “socialism.” There is a total consensus, at least in America, that the only way to make economic progress is to CUT taxes, to unleash the productivity of the free enterprise system, to stifle government, which is wasteful and inefficient, etc, etc. On these things, everyone agrees. Republicans, Democrats, President Obama, governor-elect Jerry Brown, everyone. “Private” reigns supreme. “Public” is an evil word.
Back when I went to college, most reasonable people knew that some of society’s functions properly belong in the private sphere, and some not.
Except for Communists, most of us agreed that the means of production should not be nationalized, i.e. owned and run by the government. We agreed that Capitalism was the right way, as far as industry was concerned.
However, we also knew that society requires many essential services which could not and should not be provided for profit. These include public safety, education, health care, retirement benefits, unemployment compensation, arts and recreation, defense, infrastructure, among others.
Now, there is a push to privatize nearly everything.
Since the 1980s, private prisons and juvenile facilities have multiplied in California, Arizona and other states. This is an abomination.
In education, public schools and universities are being starved for funds. Obviously there should be a place for both private and public schools. But what is developing is an incredibly unfair two-tier system. Those who can afford to send their children to elite, private schools (the two words are synonymous) perpetuate their privilege, while public schools are descending into mediocrity. In Higher Education, even public colleges are becoming prohibitively expensive for many, and increasingly subject to the vagaries of the marketplace, as state funding declines year after year.
Health care: Don’t even get me going on this. The superiority of single-payer, public health care which exists in every other Western country, from Canada to Europe, is a fact.
Old age: When America passed Social Security in 1935 and Medicare in 1965, it joined the ranks of the civilized world. Now, Republicans are clamoring for its privatization. Everywhere defined benefits plans are being replaced by defined contributions. Now the retired and the elderly can gamble with their meager old-age safety net!
Arts and Recreation: During the last election, Californians didn’t even have the foresight to vote for an ANNUAL $17.00 (!) fee to save the state park system. What sort of a nation are we becoming? Shall we let Yellowstone, Yosemite and all our other great national treasures perish? Today the budget of the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities is a fraction of what it was 20 years ago. 1.5% (!) of National Public Radio’s budget is public money, yet the know-nothing Right is clamoring to “defund” it.
Even defense is becoming privatized: There are MORE private DOD contractors in Afghanistan and Iraq than troops! Our wars are becoming mercenary affairs.
Transportation: To what extent transportation should be for-profit is debatable. We have all learned to live with the airline companies, Greyhound, Amtrak, etc. I personally favor public train systems such as the magnificent French SNCF. But one thing we should all agree on is that the INFRASTRUCTURE is a governmental responsibility. Surely roads, bridges, railroads and airports should be built and maintained at the taxpayer’s expense, no? They are part of the commonweal. Or do you want Interstate 80 and US 50 to become private roads, only accessible for fees?
I suppose this is the culture. We have always been a business culture. And now, with a vengeance. leave comment here
6 comments:
I'm sickened by the state parks issue. I'd be willing to bet good money that if we asked CA voters to pay $17 a year for unlimited access to movies and video games online, they'd vote that in with a landslide.
Most people are no longer enchanted by nature or things that take longer or more attention to appreciate. We want it faster and flashier.
Dani
You are so right.
I agree with the general point you are making. A country that abrogates its every responsibility and opportunity to promote the publuc good doesn not have a bright future.
A coupleof the specific examples fell pretty flat for me.
(1) On Social Security, you may have been a little unfairly tough on Republicans. What you said (they want to privatize) is true. I believe The President's attempt to psuh a reduction in the SocialSecurity payroll tax will do far more damage to this essential program than anything we have seen. This payroll tax reduction is the most clear example of Reagan's "Starve the Beast" garbage-speak I have seen in my life.
(2) California parks - The $17 fee did not come with a guarantee that these collected taxes would provide better parks. I guess we were meant to trust the politicians on that one.
I read every word of the proposition, and nowhere in the proposition was language prohibiting the legislature from dollar-for-dollar reducing parks' funding from the General Fund to nullify the impact of the new tax on park funding. Such requireemts are generically called "maintenance of efforts clauses". No such clause was included in this very faulted proposition.
In the past in California, such situations have not lead to improved funding for the targeted Government service (look at school funding propositions, for example).
The most likely result of this propositions passage would have been (a) a new tax, and (b) no improvements in the total funds available for parks, and (c) yet another good example the anti-tax folks could use in the future to demonstrate that more taxes does not result in mopre beneficial expenditures.
Besides, a flat $$ tax per vehicle is regressive, the poorer get hit harder.
So I do not believe Calfornians voted against having parks. They voted against being swindled again.
Holy Crud, my comment was almost as long as the post!
Hi Steve,
Thanks for your arguments.
I agree with you that tampering with the Social Security withholding rates, as the administration and congress have now decided to do, is really bad.
If Social Security dies in a few years, conservatives will say, "I told you so. The program was not solvent."
In reality, it will have been killed by such shenanigans as the "temporary" reduction in withhodings now being proposed, and likely to pass.
Regarding the parks, I will mull over your arguments and get back to you (maybe).
Hi Dani,
right.
Another example comes to mind: How much do Californians waste on lottery tickets, or at Casinos, particularly those who can least afford it...
I know, I know, it's a free country. I am not advocating forcing people to do any thing. Just bemoaning their priorities, as you do.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!