Privatisation vs Nationalisation.

What criteria do you believe decides whether something should be Privatised or Nationalised (or otherwise)? I have a few ideas, but to ensure no one is biased against the OP turning the thread into a flame war I will post as anonymous later once my IP rotates.

Is it a benefit or a burden?  Either way, really. 

For privatisation, the question is: can money be made from this in a way that will not degrade the quality of service? 

For nationalisation, the question is: is doing so vital to the interests of the nation and of the people within it?  Is the current state of affairs causing unmitigated harm?  Does the government have to get involved? 

As a socialist I belive that the means of production must be at the workers. A anonymous and bureaucratic state comapy that act on a private market dosen't make things better for the workers.

However, a state owned compay have the possibility to be progressive when it comes to workplace democracy and social responsibility. So I guess I support nationalisation of many companies.

LOL, Nationalisation sure worked out for latin american countries, now didn't it.  Oh wait, no they were all in huge piles of debt after about 40 years.  State ownership for the fail.

>>2

>For privatisation, the question is: can money be made from this in a way that will not degrade the quality of service? 

Complete bullshit.
The quality of service MUST rise because it's important to create demand for something since otherwise you wouldn't be able to make profit.
free market goods > communist goods

>>5

Not true. Just look at Microsoft.

Once one dominates the market you can do what the fuck you like.

Anybody ever bought condoms other than Durex? CPUs other than AMD or Intel? Off brand Post-its?

Whenever I phone customer service for any company, it sucks. Quality of service never rises, just gives the illusion of it with fancy marketing, in order to maximise profit.

>>6

I look at Microsoft and see that you didn't do so yourself.
A debate is like a gunfight and you showed up with a fucking knife.
Unless you're a martial arts master and Hollywood's depiction of combat is true you'll have hard time proving your retarded claims.
Ready? Fight!

>>7
www.opera.com

>>8

You rolled a 1. It's a critical miss.
Roll a d100 to determine the effect on the fumble chart.

a combination of hardcore fascism and totalitarian communism

>>6
ur made of fag, propaganda and AIDS!

If you were actually a worked a day in your life instead of being some retarded impressionable 17 year old you might have legitamate opinions.

I myself like trojan condoms.  Also E-machines tech support and customer service is over-the-top good.  I actually went out of my way to let them know how good the service was I was so impressed.

Microsoft... eh, but the market adapts and it's losing it's hold over the whole OS scene.  How many Mac fags are out there right now?

In a different system you'd be stuck with Microsoft because the retarded politicians would decide that that was good enough and what we "needed" and then no change would occur.  Except instead of operating systems it would be food.  And then you die.

When corporations control the government, there is no difference between privatization and nationalization.

>>11
huh?
>>12
truth. and both are fucking retarded.

too bad the human race doesnt have a common goal - except for dominance and control over other humans...

Truly we'd be fucked if an extinction level event ever happened since we don't even know how the fuck to work together.

>>12

that's retarded
reality isn't a sci-fi book which doesn't need inner logic
tell me, why would a totalitarian government, which is the only type that would allow complete control over the citizen, let that happen?
or on the other side, how are corporations are going to change something by controlling a minimalist government which is the only form that gives them enough power

FAG !!!!!1111

http://free-game-downloads.mosw.com/abandonware/pc/role_playing_games/games_d_f/darklands.html