What does private enterprise do well?

Corporatism, which is currently what we have is not uncontrolled capitalism. Rather it is powerful business interests welded to the state (many states actually). What I really find amazing is that nobody seems to get this. You have mountains of government regulations and bureacracies, theoretically to protect the interests of the citizens against overly powerful businesses and their potential abuses. Yet practically, the giant corporations you all hate so much (and I'll agree rightfully so in most cases) remain miraculously impervious to all this benign government intervention, where small entrepeneurs have to deal with mountians of bureacracy and corruption just to stay above water. Don't you see something wrong with this picture?

I'm kind of crushing on you right now.

Why does number two conflict with number one? If you're providing an essential service, you want to maximize the number of people who can afford that service, since everyone needs it, and you will make more money by having more customers.

Well, because, many times, the answer to a problem does not include profit? I know that's kind of a hard thing to grasp, but not every situation on the planet is there for you gain financially from.

Work people to death for profit.

Again, construing things that I did not say. In the context of "what is private enterprise good at?" there is no essential conflict between trying to make a profit, and maximizing availability. This is a different point then what you are implying I stated, which would be that those who can't afford something essential shouldn't have access to it.

there may not be a conflict in every case of private enterprise providing essential goods and services, but there is certainly the strong potential for conflict. in the open market, any number of factors can make it more profitable to sell a lesser number of units at a higher price than to sell a larger number of units at a lower price. if those factors come to bear on the market for an essential good or service, it's quite likely that a private enterprise will make their decision based on the bottom line.

Again, I couldn't disagree more.

Thats an untruth spewed forth from the LIEberal media elite.

Deleted for pedantry

Because you don't make money if it costs more to provide the product or service than it does to obtain it from you. Which means that even with the best will in the world and the goal of maximizing your market, there is a price point below which you cannot operate (at least, not day to day). Which ultimately means that you will exclude some people who require your product or service.

Right. And I don't think having a social safety net is necessarily a bad thing. I tend to think private charities can do this better then the state, but whatever. The truth is, the basic social safety net is a tiny portion of the budget. However, on the other hand, if we are to charge the government with providing essential services, it is a near certainty they will not be able to provide those services for everyone, or if they will, at an extremely, extremey high cost. Recall that nothing is free, even if its "free."

By the way, to clarify since these discussions can get convoluted, we are principally comparing government to private enterprise.

As I have mentioned before, I am an anarchist first, libertarian second. I don't believe the profit motive is the ideal means of organizing resources, but I think it is vastly superior to state control of resources and production.

I think it's great that charities exist. They help fill in the cracks. But I really wouldn't want to rely on them as the only source of social safety. Quite aside from everything else, I'm leery about the deeply religious basis of more than a few of them. Consider, for example, the Salvation Army. The name alone is a bit of a clue, no?

So, we are talking about a fantasy world. Great.

Hey, why don't you apply such unrealistic boundaries to government?

Right.

Oh, no, we do. It's your arrogance combined with stupidity that assumes we don't.

Yes. But we have also read a history book or two about the early days of our country. You should pick one up. 10 year olds working in mines and what not. Kind of fucked up.

Oh, I know, they could SUE. Litigate. That's a great answer because in the time it goes to court and the time there is a ruling, 50 pregnant 17 year olds could die picking grapes, rather than 49 saved by regulation. Sorry for saying this, but you are incredibly inhuman and spoiled. I wish you lived in the of Chota Valley of Ecuador or the slums of Dharavi. You're skull would be better used as a bowl than a storage device for your simplistic brain. I think people like yourself do humanity and mankind a great disservice. I believe your stupidity and lack of understanding of the complexity of mankind greatly harms human beings every day. You are worse than the dictator, or the mercenary. You are someone who believes they are thinking, but wastes that energy on useless and lazy thoughts. Your beliefs are vile, stupid, ignorant, simplistic, and dangerous.

Many of us have also been to or lived in a European country. We have this basic understanding that we should not all live and be treated like animals, which, whether or understand it or not, is what you are arguing for. I can only assume because you have no grasp of history. To sum up, I think you are stupid and your beliefs are subtly violent. That means I dislike you to your core.

Cheers.

So I'm going to join in with FTR for a big "EFF YOU" for assuming none of us "get" corporatism. I'd also like to point out that you attempt to make your above point--corporatism somehow does not equate with uncontrolled capitalism--with the following:

So your big point is that it isn't uncontrolled capitalism because the controls don't affect them?

Did you mean to say that because there are extant controls (that you already admit Big Corps don't follow when they can) that no entity can be said to be "uncontrolled?"

Do you want to try again, or do I pretty much have it? Once more, you seem to be slow:

You said, roughly: "The US does not have uncontrolled capitalism, it has corporatism."

Then, in the same post, you said, roughly: "Corporatism is where there are lots of controls that the corporations ignore, QED we do not have uncontrolled capitalism."

Please, by all means, feel very free to fill in the spaces. If nothing else, it will be sublimely entertaining.

Here you go and the list is not in any particular order:
1) Gives people jobs. Yes the government gives jobs but since they are the government they never fire. Since the government doesn't often fire a person it can make it more stressful to work depending on your field.
2) Gives the government money with the corporate tax
3) Lets people have the option to invest their money
4) Stock market helps people retire (police officers retirement funds are invested stock in Big Oil along with almost every other retirement plan).
5) Helps give relief efforts better then the government since it 90% of the time goes directly to the people who need the help not foreign governments.
6) Art. More art is traded, sold, and exposed to the public in the private sector then with the government grants to artists that know how to fill out paper work.
7) People have more control because it is the people that have the buying power that gives companies a larger incentive to do what is best since they don't want boycotts.
8) Build towns. This is two fold since first with out any businesses towns would die and they also buy city bonds that help pay for new construction.
9) Freedom of choice since there is always a few companies trying to offer you the same product. Therefore you get to decide what company you like better.
10) Charitable organizations that are more often better organized and efficient then the government.
11) Private enterprise bought us this web site
12) Bring us our food and can better run farming then the government (switching our farm land to corn ethanol comes to mind)
13) Gives us clothing and fashion
14) Makes us want to work hard so that we will get promoted and a pay raise
15) Makes things produced more efficiently and cost productive
16) Gives us books for reading for both knowledge and enjoyment
17) Makes it so we are not depressed. People have a hard time not working in both unemployment and retirement
18) Gives people the tools and options to better their lives
19) Provides job safety since if one company fails it doesn't mean every one would be out of a job unlike if the government ran every thing
20) Education is provided by the private sector with private schools
21) Veterinary care
22) Retirement homes
23) Avenues for people to complain about how horrible private enterprise is.

Wrong. Stupid. Ignorant. Wrong.

If your #2 is so fucking stupid, you are in serious trouble.

"Lets" The private sector "lets" people invest their money. Are you retarded? Is that really how you see the process?

Yes, pension plans are an awesome example of private enterprise in today's society. Feel free to pick up a newspaper, read it, then smash yourself in the head with a brick.

Please check the stats of charities. I mean, actually read something.

You must know a lot of artists. Clearly America's art community is exploding compared to countries like Ireland, France and Retarded (That's where you live)

Yes, like with gasoline.

Yes. And without government, most towns flourish. Really great point.

Yes. Our government is always trying to stop freedom of choice. It's really upsetting. Companies never attempt to buy up all the shelf space in a supermarket, consolidate and cross promote or limit purchasing via insurance. Never.

Unless you read up on charitable organizations and discover their bloated and insanely heinous margins.

And idiots purchased memberships.

Uh. Private enterprise is largely responsible for the current food crisis. READ.

Well, how can I argue with such a brilliant point? You win.

Man, I wish government had jobs that made people want to achieve an get ahead. Too bad everyone starts out as the local dog catcher and ends up there until the day they die.

Except for health care, which is the most bloated private enterprise going. Medicare runs with about 13% less overhead. But it's a great point in terms of dog food.

Obviously a joke. Well played. No one would make such a claim during a legitimate debate. Good one.

Right. Working in a coal mine is totally not depressing. So is working for 20 years, then getting fired because you private company can replace you with a 22 year old who does the same job for 50% less money. That is SO not depressing.

Like shovels? Please explain. I know the government didn't send me to school or teach me how to read and stuff.

Uh. Have you ever read a book? The ones about labor unrest and labor history before the 30s are quite fascinating and full of facts that make your statement utterly embarrassing. Just as I am ashamed to live in the same country with people who don't know where China is on a map, I am embarrassed of your lack of knowledge of such a rudimentary fact. You are UnAmerican.

Yes. Good point. And private schools don't take the "problem" kids. They remain in public schools, driving up the costs. If every kid was in a private school, your idiotic and numbingly simplistic belief of what education is would come crumbling down around your moronic belief system.

Well, you got me there. The government would totally let cats die. Priorities and all.

Indeed. Retirement homes flourish without Social Security money. DO YOU LIVE IN THE SAME COUNTRY AS I DO? OR HAVE YOU EVER READ A BOOK?

Actually, you know what private enterprise is really good at is golf claps. You get one here, brought to you by Suicide Girls.

1. Non-government (private business) provides the infrastructure, which enables private investors to secure higher rates of return on their investments than does similar government backed instruments.

2. Private business provides a platform for entrepreneurism unmatched by government entities

3. Private business commercializes products and services, which in turn drives down the cost of end products, making these products "affordable' to the buying community; often without subsidy

4. Private business employs most of people in this country and often competes for qualified staff, improving the earnings potential for many

5. Private business provides scale not easily matched by government efforts. That scale is characterized by broad initiatives including medical care, transportation and logistics, etc. Private business scales these services in a competitive environment.

6. Private business pays for and enables the further support, through payroll taxes, of the government

7. Private business competes better than government entities. Competition typically lowers prices, improves quality, improves the product, and enables broader choice.

That's 1/3 of the demand; I will add to the list once my flight departs SFO.

Make blimps!

I love this thread. FTR may as well be stomping through it with a flame thrower, always a fun thing to watch. But, I think the original post is based on a fallacy: That there is a difference between the public sector and the private sector. Bear with me.

First, I'll make it easy on myself and assume that we are talking about western democracies, the kind of governments that drive their power from the people. Since all discussions of corporations, enterprises, and governments are really reified terms for "groups of people acting together for a common purpose," I think it becomes obvious that individual people make up both the public and the private sectors.

Now, whether a person's primary paycheck is derived from a "public" entity (i.e. an entity legally owned and controlled by government) or a "private" entity (i.e. an entity legally owned and controlled by individuals), those people are citizens and are therefore the basis of power. So, everyone, no matter what their source of income, is the government.

Now, the people, through their elected representatives (unless they live in a very small town in New England), create the laws that govern commerce, ownership, taxation, criminal behavior, etc. In other words, they create the structure of the economy. For example, why does the U.S. have strong private property rights? Because the people, in their infinite wisdom, granted those rights to themselves through their Constitution.

So, the only things that the people, in the form of "private" organizations, can do are the things that the people, though their Constitution and government, have allowed themselves to do. Some other things are reserved only for the public sector (such as raising an army), and some other things are prohibited entirely (such as selling babies).

While there is always a healthy debate about what activities should be performed by the people acting in concert as the public sector and which should be performed by the people acting separately in their individual capacities (whether alone or banded together in groups called "corporations"), the truth is that all of these activities are performed by the same group of people: the citizens.

So, back to the original request for "a list of 23 things that the private sector does better than the government," the private sector does whatever the people have allowed it to do, in the manner in which the people have permitted, and the public sector does the same. Whether an activity is better performed by the people as a group or by the people separately has theoretically already been decided by the people or their representatives, and will likely differ from nation to nation.

everyone of these libtards is a reagan baby who has internalized the lie of the cadillac driving welfare queen. but polls show that america is more ready for democratic populous policy change than in the past forty or fifty years. youre on the wrong side of history jerkweeds!

[/keith olberman]

It's not all about restrictive regulation. Currently, large businesses exist as part of a broad legal structure. They are essentially partners with the state.