Askemos Forum

Frankly I had a hard time to understand, how it comes.

There seems to be no first class argument, which requires one or the other way. Just Cesar did it and so did Bismark. Maybe they just have just seen it as a means to enforce their rulership. Maybe they where too selfish to risk that the public authorities depend on private responsibility.

But maybe they have just forseen that there is no such thing as private responsibility, which is strong enough to guarantee for the public... Let's hope that they where wrong and that "deregulation" and free market will serve what was public good before.

But, frankly, I'm pessimistic. For one thing because I found their logic appealing, simple and clear. More impressive to me is what I'd call the great failure of privatisation of public common property...

Just some examples:

• Since the german railway was privatised, they are practically useless to so many. They just struggle. The people complain and that's it.
• The electrical power supply of the United States of America has been privatised though the past years. Now the state of their supply network is reported to be in "third world conditions". (Today an area of 1/3 of Germany had no electricity there.)
• Privatisation of power supply in Europe has undermined the country wide effords to abandon nuclear energy. Now you have to watch that your current is green, not read, black or yellow.
• Only countries with a public health insurance seem to have a reasonable, cost efficient and workin health care system.
• Still nobody attempts to pritatise the streets. Why? (With the exception of highways, which can be argued to be kind of luxory good and hence of less important.)
• And what do we actually need codes of law for? At least distribution could be privatised. Then there might be a temporary shortage of books if that suits a purpose. >,-> Or ist it already time to understand that we have a few global problems to solve on earth. And there's only one chance: make peace, go home and work together. At least on for the sake of the common goods.

Why I am so sceptic you ask? Just because the concept has successfully served a few centuries under various social orders and the other experiements indicate immediate failure and spoiled so much in 100 years? Shouldn't we give the market a bit more time?

That's a personal decision. Either wait for your grand children to ask what you did not preserve their heritage or do something to not give them a reason to ask.