loquitur

host, the fallacy of your position is that it does not follow that merely because a core government function generally gets done in a way that is effective (albeit with inefficencies and corruption on the way to get there), it necessarily follows that all functions can be done by the government. National defense is probably the one function that everyone who isn't an anarchist thinks the govt has to do. It doens't therefore follow that the govt would be good at doing most other things that aren't analogous.

roachboy, the Soviet Union was such a smashing success that I really hesitate to criticize your position. As for France, you might want to look at how long Mitterand's nationalization program lasted and with which results. Lots of countries have this or that business being government owned (often it's media). Doesn't mean it wouldn't be done better if owned privately. And btw, I was only in France once, for a week, and I really loved the place.

EDIT: Not be flip as above, Roachboy, but aren't most power suppliers historically monopolies? In light of that, shoud it be surprising that the govt (also a monopoly, but with guns) supplies power in France? It does not follow that merely because the govt runs one (largely monopoly) business well (i'm taking your word for it on that one) that it therefore can run any business well. Like Renault, say.