If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
post office privitisation
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
what do you think?
i think its always been a bad idea as it a public service of which private companies will milk the business section whilst screwing over normal postal users, all the post offices that will shut and all, of which help so many people, especially in rural areas
always gud to bring up a new topic
i think its always been a bad idea as it a public service of which private companies will milk the business section whilst screwing over normal postal users, all the post offices that will shut and all, of which help so many people, especially in rural areas
always gud to bring up a new topic
0
Comments
I find the PO quite good, it is the Royal Mail which is in tatters!
Yes, I was foolishly classing them as one and the same.
The Royal Mail are wank, the Post Office is most useful.
Privatisation doesn't work because companies are out to make a profit, at least with the government all the money is spent for our benefit (even if it's spent unwisely, ie: john prescott)
Car companies don’t make cars because they are out to make a profit.
Computer companies don’t work because they are out to make a profit.
Farmers don’t work because they are out to make a profit.
You can’t buy watches, shoes, CD’s, pens, jeans, furniture, bikes, books, ice cream because everybody who makes it are out to make a profit.
And… your parents work to make a profit, don’t they? So the don’t work. And you don’t intend to work too, because you want to make a profit. Or you don’t want? You prefer to work for free for your all life?
totally missing the point (for a change :rolleyes: )
Organisations that provide essential public services (Post Office, utilities, puboic transport etc) should be run for the public good, not for private profit.
Compare a service provided by any café, supermarket, petrol station, book shop, hair-design salon, internet provider with a service in any government’s hold office.
Which one is shittier?
And even if you find a shitty private service you are free to send it to hell and choose another. How the hell can you choose another police, another post service, another court, another custom office, another tax office? And what will happen with you if you send it to hell?
It takes longer now, they can't sort it en route, and if there's a bit of fog (like there often is at 5am) they can't use the planes.
The private sector is only interested in profit- it is what it does. Therefore the users of the service, and the staff, are ignored in favour of profit, and the service suffers. The only privatisation that has really worked has been British Airways, and that's because there is a market. Most public services are effectively monolpolies, so market forces cannot work. If the 8.10 bus doesn't turn up, you'll still be there for the 8.40 one by the same company- no money lost.
The puiblic sector is only interested in the staff, however. Instead of being interested in profit of the big company, they are only interested in personal profits. If the staff don't get their own way (i.e. big fat pay rises) the staff strike, and ordinary people get left stood at the platform anyway.
The public sector is not inherently better, as instead of profit there is militant trade unionism. It is probably slightly better than the private sector in delivering some services, such as healthcare, and slightly worse in other services- for all the faults of the bus industry now, it is still a lot better than the National Bus Company.
ShyBoy- MRSA is not about cleaning the hospitals, the term "superbug" means that the MRSA is resistant to most anti-biotics currently being used, and certainly all the generic ones. This is not because of bad cleaning, it's because for 20 years people have demanded anti-biotics on demand, and been given them, so the bacteria have gradually built up a resistance.
That's why it's so dangerous and how it first came about, but the reason there are so many cases is because nurses don't wash their hands and things like that small article here
You write ‘The private sector is only interested in profit ‘, it’s true but it’s equally true for a public sector. All its employees from high rank bureaucrats to school teachers work for profit. The difference is not what they work for but in which way they get their profits.
Any private businessman gets his money just because customers agree to pay for his goods and services. If they don’t he gets no profit at all. So customers’ will is his way to make money. Not so with public sector. Its customers are too distant from practical officials and voting once in several years is not a way to change their behaviour. An official doesn’t depend on customers, he gets his salary regardless whether well or badly he does his job… Not so though, he gets more when he works worse.
Look here, if your barber ( f*ng capitalist who owns means of production like scissors etc) does his work bad you find another barber, so you don’t pay him anymore. But in the public sphere things work in the opposite way, if some service is bad it gets more funding and subsidies.
What do you ( and every sine man) do if some private enterprise works bad? You stop paying.
What do you ( and other voters, taxpayers, ‘the public’- and consequently the government) do when some public enterprise works bad? You pay them more!
So in private sphere good work is rewarded, bad work is punished. In public sphere good work is punished, bad work is rewarded.
That tragic day of 9/11 is the best example I know. American intelligence agencies ( they are public sector of course) hadn’t manage to prevent the terrorists’ attack although they had all information they needed( quite a common thing in any bureaucratic structure that any public sector is). What did happen then? These agencies have got more money, more staff, more privileges. But what would have happened if they had managed to catch the terrorists? They would have got nothing!!!
Don’t blame ’stupid Bush’ in this, it is a common way in which all public services work. Look at schools and roads, hospitals and the police, post and the parliament and you’ll see the same thing- the worse job the more money.
Why can’t you see that ‘public sector’ road is the road of waste, regression. destruction… Isn’t Soviet Union’s lesson a sound lesson for you?
all the time like with railways ie commuters are the main users, so theres no competition of routes of anything
I know the answer ( the greatest network in the world is... what do you think? Yes, Internet! Absolutely private and anarchic stuff! So think further...) but it is not an easy task for me ( excuse me but I am not a professor of economics) to explain why natural monopolies may be parts of free market. But I'll try. I should read some stuff. So... later. OK?
However, when it comes to public services this does not work. It can work where there is natural competition, such as on (some) bus routes, but if there is no competitor there can be no competition, and if there is no competition there can be no good service.
Everyone works for profit, but your argument about the bosses earning more for bad service is flawed- it happens even more in the private sector. If a private company doesn't make enough money, the Government bails it out- this happens in transport and healthcare especially.
There is also the issue of communal good- evening and Sunday bus services lose money, in a truly free market these would just be withdrawn, and this is bad for people who rely on bus services, for instance.
Of course, there is one interesting fact abhout the rail industry at the minute. A company wished to set up a competing train service between newcastle, Leeds and Manchester, but the Government refused to allow this as "a good competing service will impact upon the current franchise holder". Eh? Either we have a free private service, or a full public service, but not a controlled monopoly, where we can't have competing trains because the franchisee might lose profit.
In theory maybe. Same as communism is fine in theory. Sadly, theory and practice are two completely different things.
Exactly.
For some services the private sector CAN be better, but in most public sector services it can't.
And as I said above, sometimes the private sector isn't allowed to be better in the public sector.