• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Private industry is not always the superior solution.

“According to Gallup’s findings, cited by the OECD, Americans are far more likely to say they were unable to pay for food than citizens of other rich countries. In 2011 and 2012, 21 percent of U.S. citizens reported food trouble, versus 8 percent of British survey takers, 6 percent of Swedes, and 5 percent of Germans. Estonia and Hungary had bigger problems with food affordability than the U.S., but both are relatively poor among developed nations.”

Lol, isn't it interesting that the article contains a pic of an obese woman eating. Nobody starves in America.

obesity.jpg
 
People are fat when they can't afford healthy food and fill up on cheap junk food.

Junk food is expensive, not cheap. The average cost for a meal at McDonald's is $10 to $15. Healthy food is dirt cheap thanks to capitalism and markets. Frozen chicken breast is $2lb per pound, eggs are about $1.50 per dozen, rice is $0.50 per pound, and you can buy big bags of frozen veggies for $6 at walmart.
 
Junk food is expensive, not cheap. The average cost for a meal at McDonald's is $10 to $15. Healthy food is dirt cheap thanks to capitalism and markets. Frozen chicken breast is $2lb per pound, eggs are about $1.50 per dozen, rice is $0.50 per pound, and you can buy big bags of frozen veggies for $6 at walmart.

Junk food is not expensive.
 
[
Given your earlier comment, I was assuming that this statement was intended as a criticism of such policies.



While the word "inentive" is obviously missing a "c" and it should have read "incentive," I did mean to use the word bound. It is used in the sense of a limit. It might have been clearer if I used the more common plural "bounds" instead. So, let me rephrase that.

Competition ensures that businesses will eventually pay a price for not properly fulfilling the demands of customers. For example, while it might be the case that engineers and designers working for car manufacturers such as Ford make decisions about how to modulate safety, comfort, space, style and more when building new cars, the truth is that they aren't the real boss here. Consummers are the boss. Try as they might, you cannot sell cars, trucks and SUVs to people by force; it has to fit the demands of consummers. As long as those consummers have some kind of outside option, this becomes a very serious problem for Ford: well, you can also buy from General Motors, Honda, Toyota, Kia, etc. So, the fact that they are after profits ends up playing in your favor. They have every motivation on Earth to provide people with something that comes as close as possible as matching all of their demands, possibly even demands they didn't even know they had, and to do it at the best price possible.

Now, none of the above is true of governments. Bureaucratic organizations do not benefit from providing you with exceptional service, nor do they benefit from making sure they are as cheap as possible to run for tax payers. In many cases, the incentives are actually quite perverse. Imagine that you task a governmental agency with deterring discrimination and encouraging the participation of a plurality of individuals in the labor market. That would be the job of the EEOC in the United States. What should the EEOC be doing? Ideally, we would like the EEOC to do such a good job as to put itself out of business... But, in reality, the political and social influence of managers and the jobs of hundreds of people hinge on the agency neither being disbanded, nor reduced. So, what you should expect from the EEOC is that it will always exaggerates the need for its services... If discrimination isn't happening on a grand scale, we'll expand the definition of discrimination; and if even this isn't enough, we will bully people into settling out of courts to use their settlements as evidence of rampant discrimination.

The mangement and the employees of the EEOC can profit from doing everything you wouldn't want them to do and, obviously, they can profit from exaggerating the amount of funds they need. Virtually none of what they do or of what they say can be trusted because there is a clear conflict of interest at play here -- and that's generally the incentives faced by bureaucratic organizations.


I mostly agree but you forget that private industry is also subject to downsides. There is the incentive to fleece the public by monopolization and fraud. There is also no inherent loyalty to a corporation as their is in public employees. There is something to be said for a workforce that believes in a cause and that there efforts are integral to that cause. There are also the same incentives for advancement as in the private sector. Competency is rewarded.
 
Lol, isn't it interesting that the article contains a pic of an obese woman eating. Nobody starves in America.

View attachment 67309637

Whoa - slow down on the hard core use of science and economic data there, bud. I wasnt expecting you to wheel out “how can poor people be fat?” Just not fair.
 
If you truly believe that, do you support nationalizing most if not all of the American economy?

It already is. Corporations use our tax money like a slush fund. Municipalities force us to pay for multi billion dollar stadiums for people that own sports franchises. Provide giant tax breaks to massive corporations just so they can afford cheap labor.

This country is a upwards socialist shithole, which is to say it’s a crony capitalist haven.
 
It already is.

No it isn't. Corporate welfare isn't socialism.
Corporations use our tax money like a slush fund. Municipalities force us to pay for multi billion dollar stadiums for people that own sports franchises.

To put it more accurately, politicians confiscate tax money and then give some of the stolen money to their friends and allies. This is a standard feature of democracy.
 
No it isn't. Corporate welfare isn't socialism.


To put it more accurately, politicians confiscate tax money and then give some of the stolen money to their friends and allies. This is a standard feature of democracy.

Oh, they take way more than “some”. We are Venezuela. They just allow the plebs to buy iPhones on payment plans is the biggest difference.
 
I wasnt expecting you to wheel out “how can poor people be fat?” Just not fair.

No, it's how can fat people be hungry.

Is it too much to ask of you to follow your own argument?

I wrote this:

aociswundumho said:
That's why in countries where food is sold on the market people are fat, and in countries where the means of production regarding food is controlled by the state people are usually starving.

You responded with this nonsense:

“According to Gallup’s findings, cited by the OECD, Americans are far more likely to say they were unable to pay for food than citizens of other rich countries.

The implication is that they are hungry or starving, since they can't buy enough food. But the fact is that the poorest in America are the most obese.
 
No, it's how can fat people be hungry.

Is it too much to ask of you to follow your own argument?

I wrote this:



You responded with this nonsense:



The implication is that they are hungry or starving, since they can't buy enough food. But the fact is that the poorest in America are the most obese.

I responded with data. You responded with a silly anecdotal question based on your own poor understanding of nutrition.

Try again.
 
If you truly believe that, do you support nationalizing most if not all of the American economy?

Why would I advocate that?

You make no sense.

You should be embarrassed by your presumed assumption or the implications therein.

If you care to speak with me you need to up your game, ask insightful questions, I won't deal with such silliness.

Peace
 
Junk food is expensive, not cheap. The average cost for a meal at McDonald's is $10 to $15. Healthy food is dirt cheap thanks to capitalism and markets. Frozen chicken breast is $2lb per pound, eggs are about $1.50 per dozen, rice is $0.50 per pound, and you can buy big bags of frozen veggies for $6 at walmart.
You can get two hamburgers @ McD for $4.00 off the dollar menu ... and very appealing for people who have to work two jobs to make ends meet and have no time to cook.
 
You can get two hamburgers @ McD for $4.00 off the dollar menu ... and very appealing for people who have to work two jobs to make ends meet

Only about 8% of all workers have more than one job, and you need to add fries and a drink for a typical meal.

and have no time to cook.

The average American spends wastes about 4 hours per day watching teevee. They have plenty of time.
 
Why would I advocate that?

Because in post #127, you said private industry is seldom superior to government.

If you believe government is superior, then it follows that you should support nationalization.
 
Because in post #127, you said private industry is seldom superior to government.

If you believe government is superior, then it follows that you should support nationalization.

It only follows to one of little cognitive skill.

Be gone, I honestly cannot be bothered with such ignorance of thought.
 
No, it's how can fat people be hungry.

Is it too much to ask of you to follow your own argument?

I wrote this:



You responded with this nonsense:



The implication is that they are hungry or starving, since they can't buy enough food. But the fact is that the poorest in America are the most obese.

Fat people can be malnourished and unhealthy. Hooray for capitalism!
 
Only about 8% of all workers have more than one job, and you need to add fries and a drink for a typical meal.



The average American spends wastes about 4 hours per day watching teevee. They have plenty of time.
Ok, then its $8 for a meal if you do it that way.

People who have more than one job need a life too and should be accounted for.
 
Private industry is not always the superior solution:

There are people that believe “government’s the problem rather than solution. I heard Milton Friedman state that half of what our federal government’s spending is wasted. A great proportion of all other than federal spending, (including commercial and personal spending) is also “wasted”.

We, as individuals generally believe that governments’ spending for what we approve of, to the extent that’s spent in manners that we approve of, is justifiable; all other governments’ spending is less than justifiable. That’s politics. There are extremely few items of governments expense that are not controversial. Governments’ lines of expenses are criticized or subject to objections by some aggregate individuals or groups. Political disagreement occurs more so in democracies but also occurs within nations of only one political party or of extremely few leaders.

Outsourcing some specific government functions would be contrary to the public’s interest. There are some government functions that can be outsourced, but government rather than private industry provides them in a superior manner. Many other nations provide their population Wi-Fi, medical insurance, railroads and other public transportation at lesser expense and in a manner superior to that of the United States. It’s nonsense to contend that private industry does or will perform every function in a manner superior to government.

Respectfully, Supposn
The problem with gov spending is it is largely done without any meaningful accountability.
 
Because of their own bad choices.



Indeed, capitalism is why healthy food is so cheap and plentiful.

They do not choose to be so poor that they can't afford healthy food. Health food is not cheap and plentiful nor easily accessible.
 
Because of their own bad choices.
I have Nobel prize idea! We must tell everyone. that you need to choose to be a millionaire! How no one had guessed it before...
Personally, I choose a yacht and a house in Tahiti, an apartment in Paris and a Bentley for ride. I think even you will agree, that this is a good choice.
P.S. I m sory, someone already thought about good choices:

 
Last edited:
They do not choose to be so poor that they can't afford healthy food. Health food is not cheap and plentiful nor easily accessible.

Yes it is. I eat healthy, and it's cheaper than eating junk food. I will copy and paste from my other comment about this:

Healthy food is dirt cheap thanks to capitalism and markets. Frozen chicken breast is $2lb per pound, eggs are about $1.50 per dozen, rice is $0.50 per pound, and you can buy big bags of frozen veggies for $6 at walmart.
 
Back
Top Bottom