The good and bad of “privatization.”

Let’s understand the cash motive: “private” companies can give campaign bribes and “public entities” cannot. So who is your politician going to favor?

By Jack E. Lohman

Governor Scott Walker’s decision to “privatize” the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) could be argued two ways.

Yes, government “bureaucrats” are irresponsible and impart excessive regulations on its taxpayers and corporations, all to build their own department and pay scale. But privatization requires additional expenditures to cover shareholder profits and high executive salaries. And ultimate fraud! And political bribes!

Which is worse? Is Walker 100% wrong, or just owned by industry?

Clearly they both need oversight, but private companies give cash bribes so they clearly will have a free hand to do what they want. Do you want politicians calling the shots? Ones that are on the take?

Private companies that overcharge the government should be castrated, as for example the $600 toilet seats and troops that cost taxpayers five times what government troops would cost. But eliminate the political bribes and even these would go away. The politicians would find a way to do it right, if they were paid by us instead of them.

But this is a people problem

Both Democrats and Republican voters are drinking the Kool-Aid on both sides, and the politicians are just doing what they can get away with. If you ever want to know why jobs are sent to China, simply follow the money. Who were tyhe NAFTA supporters?

If you ever wonder why the system remains broken, it’s because the politicians like it broken. To fix it would cut off their money flow.

This election is key. Whether Obama or Romney or Stein, we must move the House and Senate back to the center. The extremists and corporate-candidates must be cast aside.

One Response to The good and bad of “privatization.”

  1. The system is not broken—it is fixed–follow the money bribes.