Public Control versus Privatization, the True Cost of a Privatized Democracy

The issue of public control versus private control has been at the heart of the uncivilized world since the hierarchical structure freak started to exist. The democratic claim is far from democracy unless all institutions are focused on the well-being of the collective, the whole, the People it is said to serve. Our current society like many others in the past has allowed external interests to interfere with its democratic process. One of the main issues is that the word democracy does not mean what most persons in society imagine it does. Another issue is that of the public citizen as the only private entity versus the Frankenstein that was crated with corporate personhood and citizens united decision by the SCOTUS. Under current societal pyramidal, hierarchical, structure the idea of government and people serving two opposing masters seems quite normalized. So, the nanny state on one hand serves the corporate state while all that the corporate state does is to care for the profit of investors and stock holders while the people whose government is suppose to exist does not appear to be anywhere in sight beyond an insipid claim without any validity or reliability. Our citizens have been raised and trained to hate the same public government they are supposed to control. This government of the people by the people and for the people seem to only represent the corporate private entities in society. These private criminal shelters where corporate crimes take place with full impunity are obviously fully detached from the common well being of society as a whole. Corporations only benefit the one percent strata above , the same class usurping all power, resources and wealth produced by the workers.


What is Privatization?

Privatization refers to the transferring of assets, control or ownership of a Public entity into the hands of what professor Noam Chomsky from MIT calls an unaccountable tyranny. The Greeks first understood this transferring transaction under the idea that “to privatize is to steal” two and a half millennia ago. If a common good was handed to an entity with other goals that to serve the collective, the public, then the entity was lost in the hands of those who did not have the people as an end but as means to an end. Things have not changed much except to say the least since citizens have become complacent and in many ways even naive with regards to advertising and marketing of ideas; these entities both, public as well as private, have managed to obtain or reject the public support within the realm of consent. Population’s consent is being manufactured these days and this changes the outlook of how these entities are viewed despite of available data and research. In all fairness, we must first engage the idea of purpose and reasons for each entity and in doing so we will explore what privatization means for workers, the public receiving services as well as the democratic implications of privatized entities. We will consider many aspects not only of privatization but also  publicly ran entities. At then end we will conclude that the best system is that which does not slave our workers and does provide the most benefits for the dollar spent along with the fact of which system can be controlled, improved and modified by the democratic process.


Why Should Society Focus on Public Government?

One main issue to consider is that a true democracy can only be public and direct because otherwise such social entity would not be serving the people, the public, but other societal entities which would have to be disassociated from the well being of the collective, society as a whole. Our society keeps the claim and facade of a public government because the only actual type of democracy is a public democracy even as out system is actually a participatory democracy. A true democracy is a Public institution without any external interference of any type, no lobbyists not serving any external interests such as hierarchical capital or any other external institution. If a government in a democracy, a direct democracy, is said to be of the people, by the people and for the people then lobbyists and representatives even political figures are a pathology, a malignant tumor. Public institutions have as the only end to their means to serve the whole, the collective. Although societies could be ran under this direct democracy type of fashion they are instead ran in a representative democracy type of fashion, the republics and the parliamentary monarchies, etc. The reason for the previous is because in a representative democracy, such as a republic, the representative can be purchased via Citizens United or any other means, such as lobbyists. Also because this representative democracy and politicians are nothing more than public relations demagoguery experts who tell the masses what they wish to hear while  simultaneously representing the interests of the present private sector, the corporations and the wealthy, but never the people. 


Yes, but Aren’t Competition and Free markets Least Expensive and More Efficient?

No, and contrary to folkloric and urban beliefs, neither the Competition Fallacy nor the Free Market Fantasies can help society in any fashion as these institutions’ goal is the creation of eternal growth via profit but never the quality of the service or who it is provided for. Any institution’s goal must include and make a priority the people it serves as its target of satisfaction. Private Free market fantasy institutions have profit as their goal and never the quality of the service being provided. Private entities are seen as efficient when they can produce profit even if this means to slave the working class. Satisfaction for a private entity means public relations or happy investors never the people they serve as service is not anywhere in the actual goals of a for profit entity. The competition fallacy clearly states that if several companies were to compete in any market area they will all lose as demonstrated by John Nash Jr. with his Game Theory and even the subsequent Prisoner’s Dilemma. When corporations compete, the price of good or services they provide diminishes. This competition also diminishes the projected revenue and profit corporations can potentially make. Corporations try to either create monopolies which are in theory against Free market principles, or they try to create cartels, same violation or even destroy the competition by tariffs or tax subsidies or even price gauging. Furthermore, corporations tend to eliminate workers as they succumb to true and actual competition, or shedding their workforce under the excuse of restructuring, or elimination benefits for workers, or even violating any potential labor law by increasing work load on workers while avoiding increasing wages as profit becomes a prerogative for a corporation whose power has been diminished by competition. Under the corporate bible if a corporation fails to produce profit then it must close. On the contrary, public entities can remain open even running them at loss since the goal is not profit but providing a service. A clear example of why competition is not healthy for corporations can be easily seen with Cable companies. Cable companies avoid competition by dividing the pie by zip codes or areas where one or another covers this way their prices do not compete against one another and they can freely increase the cost of services provided as they become the sole area provider. It is not often that two or more cable companies cover the same area. 

Big Pharma

Answering your questions about Sen. Sanders’ single-payer bill. Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP):

Privatized Democracy a Contradiction in Terms

Our citizens and world population appeared to have drank the privatized poisoned kool-aid too soon. The vast majority of people fail to understand that the goals of a private entity are not the same goals for public welfare. The goals of a private entity are never the same that the goals of a public one. The public entity will always seek to provide and even amend irregularities pertaining to goods and services provided for the common welfare of society. Meanwhile, private entities have their own interests which in the vast majority of times, actually all of the time, seek to increase profits without any regard to externalities. Externalities are side effects of doing business under privatized control. Workers lose their benefits, workers get fired in mass, rivers get polluted, the environment gets destroyed, the sixth extinction is approaching but profit can still be made so let’s welcome our own extinction so as long as profit is made. If democracy is the vote and voice of the majority, the collective, then privatization is exactly the opposite, the vote and voice of a few, very few hand full versus the true majority. CEO’s make billions in bonuses at the expense of not providing services and underpaying the workers while usurping not only their power and even their wealth created. The cost of even allowing the private corporate sector to exist is just a monstrosity from hell. Trillions of dollars wasted under the misrepresentation that corporations create jobs or even progress when the reality is quite far from such idea of the words progress and corporations in the same sentence.


Medicare for ALL saves 500 billion Annually and it covers Dental, vision and mental Health, bill introduction:


Poverty in America, the cost of the PRIVATE sector in a Quasi-Democracy, documentary: