Guest Voice: Let’s Go Private
Jul 18th, 2007 | 2 responses
NOTE: The Moderate Voice runs Guest Voice posts from time to time by readers who don’t have their own websites, or people who have websites but would like to post something for TMV’s diverse and thoughtful readership. Guest Voice posts do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Moderate Voice or its writers. This guest post is by Hunter Hatfield, who is also writes comments under our posts here under the name of Paca True.
Let’s Go Private
By Hunter Hatfield
I have always been very open to the idea that many things which the government does today could be done privately. However, when it comes down to it, I frequently have a hard time coming up with much of a practical list. So, I’d like to open my conundrum up to TMV readers.
Here are some questions that might bring up possibilities in your mind:
When you vote now, one reason is possibly because you think the government should be doing something that it is not. Go through that mental list. Can any of it be done without the government?
What does the government do now, inherently by force due to mandatory taxation, that might be done without force?
What are some things the government does that you agree are worth doing ethically and politically but that might be done without the government, by private citizens or organizations?
One thing not to put down, should you decide to respond, is lobbying. Any number of private organizations can be created whose purpose is not to solve the actual problem, but to persuade government to solve it in some way. We want to throw those out for now.
Some items seem inherently governmental. A private organization cannot change a law. But could we bedoing something right now to solve the health care crisis without waiting for government? How about adequate psychological care for returning vets? How about improving diplomatic and cultural ties with other nations? How about making your city’s worst schools its best?
My problem is I can think of a million reasons that a private citizen cannot do all these things. Not on thescale needed to have an effect. I want to be wrong about that. Even though the U.S. is already one of the greatest givers in the world to philanthropic societies, I want there to be a creative, non-coercive solution to problems. If government is broken, our culture need not be.
I’m particularly interested in going beyond the answer that “the government should not do X because it has no constitutional or moral right to do so.” Let’s not stop there, but move to the next step: “If not with government, then how do we get it done without government?”
I look forward to your thoughts. Thank you!
Hunter Hatfield is currently a doctoral student in linguistics and cognitive science at the University of Hawaii with a previous M.A. in philosophy. In between these academic jaunts he spent a decade in the computer industry.
2 Responses to “Guest Voice: Let’s Go Private”
Many great things in society can be changed by a willing and dedicated populace, but the requirement is rather high. To me, the argument “we don’t need government, if everyone just pitched in we could do it ourselves” sounds as pretty (and as impractical) as “everyone should share with one another, no one should have very much more than anyone else”. The first is considered convervatism, the second communism, but neither work entirely because they both depend too much on trusting everyone to play fair.
The key is striking a balance between the two. It’s much easier in very small communities. The northern spanish village where my mothers cousin lives, the lifstyle is very conservative but at the same time they unconsiously function as a commune. She has cows, so she milks them and has an excess of milk. So she goes around to neighbors and gives them milk, and they in return give her meat, fruit etc. All excess is sold at the market for other goods. They don’t really think about it, it’s just “always been that way”. The way we depend on one another gets much muddier as populations grow larger, which is when government steps in.
The ideal is a government large enough to provide the very basics in case of need, but not so large that it prevents you from getting, if you have the inclination and means, better goods and services.
Businesses, especially publicly held corporations, are about profit. Nothing more and nothing less. When publicly held in modern America the opinions of Wall Street analysts come ahead of customers. Look at what’s happening to Dell. Crappy customer service from people working for outsourcing firms that are having such major staffing problems that many of their hires don’t have the mastery of English they are supposed to possess is de rigeur. A ZDNet blogger recently wrote of what he went through with them in spite of having a next business day on site warranty that he paid extra for. The link is to the first entry on his “adventure”. The most recent entry is Day 14. They actually led him through disassembling a major portion of his laptop before agreeing to send a new part and a tech to install it. This is not that unusual for what passes for customer service in the modern corporation. There are the many examples of health insurance companies disallowing treatments and prescriptions so they don’t have to pay out money as well as their habit of taking many months to pay doctors, hospitals and labs. Then there is the rigging of the energy markets that traders took part in that caused many people to pay far too much for electricity in California.
Enron, Andersen (Enron’s auditors), Tyco, Adelphia, Global Crossing and how many others have shown that the profit motive can go mad. Why would we really want to entrust government services to that system? I don’t see proposals from most of those pushing the concept of privatization to reign the private companies and those who run them in hard if caught in abuses. Only with extremely strong systems in place to ensure transparency and crushing penalties should they be caught should it even be a possibility to privatize most government services.