"I know not what treason is, if sapping and betraying the liberties of a people be not treason." ~ Cato
The Problem with Privatization
Submitted by BrianAnderson on Fri, 2012-01-27 01:00
"...the call for privatization does not get at the real reason the private sector works better than the political sector. The great advantage of the private sector is not private ownership per se but that private owners compete with one another. Classical liberals would do better to contrast not the “private” and “public” sectors, but the 'competitive' and 'monopolistic' sectors."
0
Your rating: None
User Login
Search This Site
Recent comments
-
23 hours 32 min ago
-
1 day 13 min ago
-
1 day 10 hours ago
-
1 day 13 hours ago
-
2 days 2 hours ago
-
2 days 4 hours ago
-
2 days 5 hours ago
-
3 days 12 hours ago
-
4 days 12 hours ago
-
4 days 20 hours ago
Root Strikers
Supporters
Merchandise
User Map
Latest Tweets
New recommended column on STR: Ten Reasons Why Libertarianism Is the Way of the Future http://t.co/kE9HDSOZCN
1 week 6 days ago
New recommended column on STR: Swarm Intelligence and Dynamics http://t.co/9PcrR0bEKR
2 weeks 11 hours ago
New recommended column on STR: The Pope Joins the Chorus in Blaming Free Markets http://t.co/Z1ijEdco2x
2 weeks 2 days ago
- 1 of 40
- ››







Reprint Rights
Comments
It's interesting that state media types came up with terms a few years ago in their endless "subliminal" quest to defuse grumbling about the thievery by predators of state: "sectors". We're often treated with deep discussions pertaining to the "private sector" vs the "public sector", etc etc. Ever so often I think they talk about other "sectors", but I couldn't tell you what they are.
But if you take just a cursory look, there are two sectors: a producing sector and a parasitical sector. Franz Oppenheimer would say a "work sector" and a "robbery sector":
There are two fundamentally opposed means whereby man, requiring sustenance, is impelled to obtain the necessary means for satisfying his desires. These are work and robbery, one's own labor and the forcible appropriation of the labor of others. . . . I propose in the following discussion to call one's own labor and the equivalent exchange of one's own labor for the labor of others, the "economic means" for the satisfaction of need while the unrequited appropriation of the labor of others will be called the "political means". . . . The State is an organization of the political means. No State, therefore, can come into being until the economic means has created a definite number of objects for the satisfaction of needs, which objects may be taken away or appropriated by warlike robbery.
Franz Oppenheimer, The State (New York: Vanguard Press, 1926) pp. 24-27
http://www.franz-oppenheimer.de/state0.htm
Sam