My thoughts on this are a little more radical than most and extend to basic services as well. For example, I also believe that health insurance and health care have no business being run by for profit corporations because like I said above a shareholder held company's primary motive is providing a return on investment for their shareholders. Providing quality of care and affordable rates to subscribers and patients is secondary. They will by their very duty to their stakeholders charge patients as much as they can and provide as low of a quality of care as they can get away with so long as it doesn't break the letter of the law or compromise their profitability.
My thoughts on this are a little more radical than most and extend to basic services as well.
I don't see that as radical and am stunned more people don't feel like you.
As to Seaworld,never been there,but I'd do a happy dance if they declared bankruptcy and slide back under their putrid corporate rock to die.
I'm surprised too, but I'm naturally biased in favor of ideas that I like. It's like most people don't understand what for-profit corporations are for, and they're not able to differentiate between their motives and the means to realize those motives. The primary motivation for all for-profit corporations is to make a profit for their shareholders, and that's true for all of them regardless of how beloved or how hated they are. Everything those corporations do, what they make and the quality standard to which they make it, the services they provide and the quality of service they provide, the marketing they perform, everything is done with the motivation of making the highest return on investment possible. For some industries this seems fine; consumer electronics, manufacturing, retail, areas where competition is sufficient or where their market is not related to essential services. But utilities? Health care? Assisted living facilities? Prisons? Pharmaceutical companies? For these it seems that the drive for profit could be in direct opposition to the quality of services they provide. And the services are essential. We all want power and water. We all want to be healthy. And, well, some of us want those incarcerated to have a basic standard of care. Do we really trust an entity to provide those services for us when the primary motivation of those entities is to extract as much money out of us with for as little cost as possible?
Some might say not radical enough. I say cowabunga. Just kidding, I say you're on to something. Thanks for enlightening my views on public works and services.
My thoughts on this are a little more radical than most and extend to basic services as well. For example, I also believe that health insurance and health care have no business being run by for profit corporations because like I said above a shareholder held company's primary motive is providing a return on investment for their shareholders. Providing quality of care and affordable rates to subscribers and patients is secondary. They will by their very duty to their stakeholders charge patients as much as they can and provide as low of a quality of care as they can get away with so long as it doesn't break the letter of the law or compromise their profitability.
I don't see that as radical and am stunned more people don't feel like you. As to Seaworld,never been there,but I'd do a happy dance if they declared bankruptcy and slide back under their putrid corporate rock to die.
I'm surprised too, but I'm naturally biased in favor of ideas that I like. It's like most people don't understand what for-profit corporations are for, and they're not able to differentiate between their motives and the means to realize those motives. The primary motivation for all for-profit corporations is to make a profit for their shareholders, and that's true for all of them regardless of how beloved or how hated they are. Everything those corporations do, what they make and the quality standard to which they make it, the services they provide and the quality of service they provide, the marketing they perform, everything is done with the motivation of making the highest return on investment possible. For some industries this seems fine; consumer electronics, manufacturing, retail, areas where competition is sufficient or where their market is not related to essential services. But utilities? Health care? Assisted living facilities? Prisons? Pharmaceutical companies? For these it seems that the drive for profit could be in direct opposition to the quality of services they provide. And the services are essential. We all want power and water. We all want to be healthy. And, well, some of us want those incarcerated to have a basic standard of care. Do we really trust an entity to provide those services for us when the primary motivation of those entities is to extract as much money out of us with for as little cost as possible?
Oh, I absolutely agree, which is why I'm shocked I hadn't thought of it. As soon as a company goes public, it's a death knell imo.
Some might say not radical enough. I say cowabunga. Just kidding, I say you're on to something. Thanks for enlightening my views on public works and services.
Not radical at all! Preach it.