@jaywink It would be if it were a Scrooge McDuck pile of gold coins, but it rarely is.

The supermarket buys, distributes and sells food everyday, but it also at the same time makes up someone's wealth column. It could of course be a foundation, cooperative or state-run company, but I actually think a lot of things seem to be better run as private companies.

Point is, hoarding isn't quite the right term when wealth is ownership of productive capital. It wouldn't be producing more for society if someone else owned it (except when it would).

@clacke @jaywink Certainly true that there's a value to private enterprise, but most of the ways that people become billionaires seem to involve exploitation – of people, of shared resources in the form of externalities...

@clacke @jaywink

I actually think a lot of things seem to be better run as private companies

What evidence do you have to support this thought?
@hypolite @jaywink There's no lack of examples of government-run monopolies being undercut by more efficient private-run competitors, or huge once-cooperatives-now-more-like-corporations having worse service and product selections than owner-run franchise chains.
@clacke @jaywink And there's no lack of example of state-run monopolies sold to private companies ending up in a disaster for the people having to use those services because of the necessary profit margins private business have to extract. Why did you choose to only mentions the opposite scenarios?
@hypolite Because I said "a lot of things". That implies the existence of the other things. I was challenging the idea that all capitalist mode production is bad.
@hypolite @jaywink Swedish private clinics and dental clinics are most of the time better than their government competitors, in terms of availability and customer service. In less densely populated areas the government ones have the advantage of existing. 😀

Privately run schools and kindergartens are generally better viewed individually, but there's a good argument that systemically they exacerbate the class gap. Given the choice, I would (and did) put my son in a private educational institution.
@clacke @jaywink So you're saying Swedish private clinics can choose whether to locate themselves in profitable areas because the state will swoop in to cover non-profitable areas, gotcha.

And in France and the US at least, private schools are of a better quality because they receive money from both the students through the tuition and the government that still subsidies them to follow the official curriculum.

Both examples show that these private companies could not perform on their own the service the state offers if their expenses weren't somewhat offset by public money.
@hypolite @jaywink Swedish private schools get the exact same funding as the government schools in the same municipality.

And yes, I am acknowledging that the capitalist mode of production has systemic issues and is not always the best in every circumstance.
@clacke @jaywink There's no tuition in Swedish private schools? No fundraising rallies? No private donations?

And yes, capitalism is horrible for basic necessities that everybody needs. Instead of having to compete on product quality, they just rely on people having to use their product to gouge them while also pressuring providers because of the guaranteed business they are managing.

Capitalism is almost fine for luxuries for example. The small pool of people able to pull off the required product quality means that they are well-compensated while people too poor to buy these items can fall back on cheaper bootleg.
Sign in to participate in the conversation

Diaspodon.fr est une instance majoritairement francophone et généraliste. Aucun contenu du fédiverse n'est filtré par une décision d'administrateur ou de modérateur.