Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Dunedan
Yes. Yes, yes, and yes.
|
So you would sooner allow a corporation the ability to withhold water than a democratically elected and publicly accountable government? I don't get it. When you privatize resources, you essentially leave it at the mercy of the market. And when the market turns for the worse, it's the poor who are left out to dry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
like i said in the post above you, there's little doubt that states allocate resources according to the priorities that are in place at the time. in more democratic-to-democratic socialist contexts (as over against the nationalist authoritarian states that you mention for the most part, dressed up with an arbitrary reference to india) those priorities are responsive to pressure from both within (representatives) and without (organized interest groups). private systems aren't. private systems are FAR more authoritarian. there's no recourse.
|
Yes, exactly. If you cannot afford out of pocket what corporations have to offer, you simply don't get any regardless of your need. Well, that is, at least, if there is no other outside regulatory body that would suggest or do otherwise.
I'd like my water to remain the purview of the government, thank you.
How about the privatization of the constitution? The bill of rights? There are certain things that should remain in the hands of the public.