Sharing is NOT Caring----(No Matter What They Taught Us in Kindergarden)

Sharing is Caring? Not so much...
What really gave the United States the power to prosper?
John Stossel shows us "The Tragedy of The Commons"

I have argued this for a long time. Things that are "publicly owned" or "government provided" do not result in success. No one takes care of anything. There is no incentive to maximize productivity or control budgets.
 I always use this example when it comes to welfare, government education, and government healthcare:

When I pay for my own lunch, I take the price of the item into consideration when I make my purchase, I am using my own money...I think about what my budget is and what I can afford. When I go to lunch that is paid for by my company expense account (a "3rd party" or "the public money"), I order what I want, with no consideration for price.

When you are dealing with your own property and your own money, it breeds prosperity and wise decision making. Private ownership of roads, hospitals, schools, wildlife, emergency services, etc...would only make those things better. For Generation X to have a chance, we have to fight for our private property rights.


  1. So, I guess what you are saying is we only have a choice between public or private? There is no third choice? And, you don't see the lack of any other choices but these to be a problem?

    Philosophically, I prefer to see the whole public/private debate as a false choice between unpalatable alternatives. Neither really addresses the individual in society. I am either subject to thousands of arbitrary private decisions each day, or tens of very big arbitrary public decisions.

    Frankly, no one asks me my opinion on the decisions they make -- it is all take it or leave it.

    Of course, once every four year I do get to decide who gets to make all of those really big arbitrary decisions that determine my life, but is this really a substitute?

    On the other hand, since my life is dependent on an innumerable private decisions, just saying I also have the chance to make my private decisions as well is small consolation.

    For instance, as an investor, I do have a choice to buy a stock or not, but Goldman Sachs also has a right to ruthlessly front-run my purchase and strip me of my return.

    Don't get me wrong, I think both of these rights -- mine and Goldman Sachs -- are valid, but it is just thin gruel to the soul that our choices come down to such meager options.


  2. thanks! I appreciate the comment. Yes, they are horrible choices, and maybe they are "false ones", but from all I've seen, I like the private property option the best.
    I don't agree, though, that you and Goldman Sachs should have the same rights. I don't think corporations should have the same rights as individuals.

  3. I almost feel as if this argument is a straw-man. Specifically: "When you are dealing with your own property and your own money, it breeds prosperity and wise decision making. Private ownership of roads, hospitals, schools, wildlife, emergency services, etc...would only make those things better."

    Because, even if you work for a corporation, you do not own that corporation, not really have any influence in its direction and management. Yet, with publicly owned organizations, we the people do have a say in the management and, as a whole, are the owners. Companies do not do anything because they feel it's the right thing or because it's moral. They do things to make a profit. The most important thing in their lives is their companies stock price each quarter.

    Part of the problem I would argue, is that Americans are "brainwashed" into thinking that private is good and public is bad. Which is a direct relationship to the Capitalism is good; Socialism is bad debate. And this debate is always filled with opinion mostly, and hardly ever fact.

    Whether I pay the bill or not, I always turn off lights, or the heat down, if I'm not using it. Also, I would say that the insertion of religious ideology into our political discourse is part of the problem. For example: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-d-fitzgerald/on-morality-or-the-cheate_b_780316.html

  4. Frankus...thanks for the comment.
    I would like to challenge you in one area. When people think of "private" their minds automatically go to big corporations, instead of small or medium sized local businesses.
    I agree that large companies and their employees are ultimately not much more effective than a government bureaucracy.
    However, small businesses have more important things to worry about than their stock price. They have to contribute to a positive way to their community, or they won't survive.
    That's what I am trying to say with this post (and video, which I hoped you watch).
    Local people and businesses with a vested interest in something is a better way to go than a government program.