privatization rush slows

Max Sawicky sawicky at bellatlantic.net
Mon Nov 26 18:54:34 PST 2001


Not necessarily. You have to separate the issue of compensation from operating costs.

A private firm that is bankrupt, or a public enterprise with assets that can't 'make a profit' -- in either case there could be transfers to capitalists that serve no purpose and simply dispossess the general public. The owners of the bankrupt firm could be compensated for nationalization of the firm in excess of the worth of its assets, or the assets of a public enterprise could be given away below cost.

Alternatively, we could imagine a firm that can't charge enough to cover its costs because its output is substantially non-market in nature, but whose output nevertheless is a great boon to humanity. You would call this firm a 'lemon' from the standpoint of profit-maximization, but properly speaking it should keep operating in the public sector. On the other hand, a public enterprise than runs a profit could be sold off (at the right price, natch) if the costs it could charge reflect the benefits of what it provides. There is no intrinsic problem with that, IMO.

You could also imagine a firm that is subsidized by the state in excess of whatever benefits it provides to the public. That's the real lemon in lemon socialism.

I suspect there would be benefits to rebalancing the nation's transportation more in the direction of rail, less for air and auto, but I don't have any cites on this. One of the old men of URPE who is still kicking -- Elliott Sclar at Columbia -- writes about the merits of free urban public mass transit whenever somebody gives him a chance.

mbs

"To understand capitalism, read Marx; to understand socialism, read Marshall."

Patrick, isn't this the way lemon socialism works. Privatize the profitable stuff; take over the loosers.

The US nationalized passenger rail travel when it was loosing money; now they will give it back to private industry, it seems.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list