Ok so you all know about this so called "recession", which was caused by a few high up people around the world *cough bankers*, and you've seen/felt how its effected the economy but should the governments privatize public company's such as transportation companies, banks, health and medical services??
Will privatizing every f-ing thing actually help or will it hinder?
Your thoughts (intelligent ones people!)

Funny you should ask....I was just reading this...

"" Sandy Springs, Georgia may look like
any other town in America. It has
parks, roads, and beautiful places to
live. But there’s one thing that
separates this town from every other
town: Sandy Springs privatized
almost everything.
In 2005, Sandy Springs outsourced
almost all functions of the city
government (with the exception of
police and fire) to a single company,
which runs the town. That company
is in charge of running all the vital
functions of government, from the
running the parks, to paving the
roads, and even 911 calls!
The town is run very efficiently, with
zero backlogs in permit requests. Call
the city, and you’ll be surprised to
find that you actually get a friendly
person on the other line! The city has
a 24/7 non-automated customer
service hotline which fields about
6,000 calls per month. It also has a
state of the art traffic system with
cameras and a high tech command
center.
When people come to Sandy Springs,
they usually have no idea that it’s
privatized, says Sharon Kraun, media
relations director for the city. There
are no signs with corporate logos or
anything like that. According to
Sharon, “What people can tell is that
the city is well taken care of, and the
residents who live here or individuals
who work here, like being here and
are happy with the level of service
provided.”
When the project first started, the
University of Georgia estimated that
the city would need 828 employees.
But because the town is managed by
a private company, they’ve cut their
workforce down to just 471 people.
Besides fire and police, the city only
has eight full-time public employees.
Because of this efficiency, Sandy
Springs generates huge surpluses.
They have no unfunded liabilities.
The city specifically decided not to
use the traditional pension model – a
model which has put almost every
government across America in an
unsustainable pension crisis. Instead,
employees can choose their own
401K package to prepare for
retirement, if they wish.
This has given the town of Sandy
Springs lots of extra cash to work
with – a surplus that they put into
building for the future. According to
Sharon Kraun, “The city, as a matter
of policy, sets aside 25% of revenues
into a reserve during each budget
planning cycle. Capital improvements
have been a major focus during our
first eight years, with more than $185
million invested in capital
infrastructure.”
This has lead to lots of improvements
around the town. The city has
repaved 147 miles of streets, 874
storm water projects, and built 32
miles of new sidewalks.
If part of the government performs
poorly, the city can fire that
company, and bid the contract to
another company. In 2011, the city
said farewell to the main company
that was managing the vital
functions of government CH2M Hill,
and opted to go with another
company. This saved the city over a
million dollars.
Most people in Sandy Springs are
happy with the change, and
surrounding towns and communities
are adopting the privatization model.
“To date, our community has been
pleased,” said Sharon, “If the polls
are indicators, our founding mayor –
who ran on the public private
partnership platform, won two terms
in office with overwhelming support.”
After the founding mayor retired, a
new mayoral candidate, Rusty Paul,
also ran on the commitment to keep
Sandy Springs privatized, and won by
a landslide.
Many cities across the world are
looking at Sandy Springs. Oliver
Porter, one of the main architects
behind the move to incorporate the
town, has given speaking
engagements all over the world, from
Britain, to Iceland, Japan, and Latin
America. ”I’ve been increasingly
asked to give advice and lectures
around the country,” said Porter in a
recent interview with WND, “This is
also an international model.”""
Link.

In a normal setting government are meant to be able to manage all this....but when they can't anymore,they privatize...but the aim of privatization is not always met...privatization hinders lots of things...over here power supply company known as NEPA as been privatized twice or so..no changes!!they dropped workers and maybe employed again...years back they almost privatized federal schools here...but didn't!

@WalkSoftly: that's a very good example of good privatization, and I wish everything was as good as that but in Britain they privatize everything, for example, half of our rail networks is arriva, others is metro, then you have GNER, virgin, souther rail and others. Then some of our tracks are managed by network rail and other parts by other companies. This has caused loads of problems and after a major train crash a few years ago they took years to work out which company was to blame.
Some things being privatized is not for the better because the company/people in charge are complete idiots.

@Notlikeothers: true

I think privitization can work well in some instances and be a total train wreck in others. I know consevatives love President Reagan, but he completely effed my industry up. I'm sure he had good intentions, but the results are there nonetheless. That was deregulation, not privitization, by the way. We have public/private partnerships here in Tx. Some have been successful, others not so much. My thing is, if you want the government to provide a service or function you have to have the tax base to provide said service. However, the government has to be efficient in the execution of that service, which, let's be honest, here in the USA that is far from the case. So which am I for? The answer is that it depends.

@Notlikeothers: I certainly cant speak for Great Britain, but here, public entities are headed by people who couldnt make it in the private sector, Public jobs typically pay less than private ones, so public entities get the leftovers.....or the corrupt.

@ramblinman:privatization doesn't work over here

@WalkSoftly: it's probably the same here. Losers from the good sectors head up comapnies in the bad sectors.
But all of them tw@ts to be honest.
We had a banker a few years ago, his bank lost £15billion pounds and yet he still got a bonus of £1.8 million for that year, how the hell is that ok?.
And that bank had been sold back to the government!!!
Britain has gone f-ing mad!!
Give me a shot fun and there will be less idiots I promise

@impeccablesossy: I am familiar with some of the problems yall are facing there in Nigeria with privitization. And I agree, it has not worked for you.