Let Iraqis Decide What to Privatize

[Classical_Liberal]

Let Iraqis Decide What to Privatize
by Moshe Adler


The plan of L. Paul Bremer, chief U.S. administrator in Iraq, to sell government-owned companies to private investors assumes two things: that privatization is what free people anywhere prefer, and that it's what's good for them. Neither assumption is true.

In fact, when it comes to government ownership, highly developed democracies have made very different choices. Its 10 million American customers may be surprised to learn that the German government owns 44 percent of T-Mobile, the cellular phone service provider. In France the government owns 54 percent of Air France, 21 percent of the company that owns RCA and 27 percent of the car manufacturer Renault, which in turn owns 37 percent of Nissan and 70 percent of Samsung. The British government owns 100 percent of the BBC. In Finland the government is the owner of all the liquor stores and 60 percent of an energy company that owns retail gas stations. In Sweden the government is the owner ..........

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0805-04.htm

This administrations arrogance in their claim to be defenders of Democracy is bad enough in light of the way Bush was selected. Why the fact that Bremer is making these decisions for the Iraqi people, who didn't elect him, when privatization is hardly a settled issue in this country, doesn't set off alarms is something I can't fathom.

Why doesn't anyone ever ask what Bush and the neocons mean when they say they want to bring democracy to Iraq. There ideas about democracy certainly are not in line with my own.

They seem to be using thet word democracy to describe appointed Governments run for crony capitalists.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

1. Governments should govern . . . not own businesses.

Too many conflicts of interest.

[Classical_Liberal]

3. You don't get it

Maybe you oppose social security, amd National Health insurance, which is what Bremer is privatitizing in Iraq, but whether we have it, is something the American people should decide through who they elect. if we are bringing Democracy to Iraq, than Iraqies should decide. Not unelected Paul Bremer.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

5. After the country is on its feet, the elected government of Iraq can

nationalize anything they want. First, we need to get the country up and running again.

[StandWatie]

6. *cough*

They didn't need any help after '91, the oil company got together and patched most everything up in two weeks, for some reason our "help" doesn't seem to be helping anything and costs a few billion more than last time *cough*Bechtel*cough*

[whoYaCallinAlib]

10. You should take care of that cough.

From what I read, we are making progress over there. Not fast enough, but in this case I'm less concerned about the speed of the ship as I am about the direction of the ship.

[Classical_Liberal]

11. How come Bremer called off the elections?

?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

13. Postponed the election is more like it.

I presume it was because we weren't ready to give up that much control yet.

[Classical_Liberal]

14. Why not, since we are there to bring democracy?

?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

17. It takes time to reverse 30+ years of rule by a ruthless, megamaniacal

dictator. You seem like a very bright person. I'm sure you knew that it will take years to "install" a democracy, if it can be done at all. So why keep asking me silly questions?

[Classical_Liberal]

21. Looks like Bremer is introducing more corrupt mismanagement.

He is letting Enron takeover. We were out of Germany withing 5 yrs, and we didn't do anything like presume the right to privatize anything.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

22. That's news to me. I haven't read that.

Any chance you could provide me with a link? I would greatly appreciate it.

[Classical_Liberal]

27. There are German History Books

. Go to he library.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

30. You changed your post with an edit. I was responding to your

comment about letting "Enron takeover". You added the sentence on Germany AFTER I responded about your Enron comment. Using edits in this fashion is highly underhanded.

[Classical_Liberal]

34. Ok, I thought that is what you were talking about

but letting Enron and Halburton buy their governent is a takeover. That is what privatization.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

36. Again, news to me. Now, one more time, who is "buying their government"?

That would be astonishing that someone could buy a goverment.

[Classical_Liberal]

38. You have never heard of bribes?

?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

39. Okay, you are getting carried away here.

You should stop while you still have some credibility left.

[Classical_Liberal]

41. Carried away in what way

Bremer, is giving government services including their social security system, and health care system, to American firms.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

46. You said Enron was "buying the Iraqi government". Then you said by

"buying" that you meant "bribes". I would bet my house, and car and everything else I own that you don't have any proof whatsoever that Enron is buying the Iraqi government with bribes. Therefore, you are making unsupported, unsubstantiated, unprovable allegations that will not stand up to any level of scrutiny. As your democratic friend, I respectfully suggested you refrain from those sorts of accusatons to salvage what credibility you have left.

[Classical_Liberal]

48. So you don't think Bush basically represents Enron and Halburton

? You think the fact that MBNA America throwing Bush's innaguration party isn't corrupt? I suppose you think he won the election as well. I suppose you think I just imagined those Enron planes flying in freepers to terrorize vote counters in Florida, or their lobbiests in Washington. I suppose I just imagined Choicepoints role in purging Florida's blacks from the voting rolls. I suppose you don't think that is at all related to Bremer's actions in Iraq?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

50. Okay, you win. My opinions cannot compete with your facts.

I'll just shut up. Good luck to you.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

53. You did it again. Changed your post after I responded.

Not fair.

[StandWatie]

it's not moving forward

They went 900k barrels/day to 700k last month and are now actually importing oil, it's a clusterfuck and it isn't getting any better at all.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

18. Obviously, we don't read the same newspapers. It's now running

1 million plus barrels a day. The goal is 2.5 million within a year.

[Classical_Liberal]

9. If Bush's friends fuck Iraq, like they have Argentina

the country won't get back on it's feet. So do you consider social security communist. Futhermore Bremer's insistence on doing this is an indication he isn't interested in getting the country back on its feet.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

12. I don't recall ever mentioning social security.

I think it is absurd not to recognize that we are trying very hard to get this country up and running again. It might have something to do with the fact that it is absolutely, positively in our national interests to do so. Not everyone in our government is corrupt or inept. The state department is in charge of reconstruction and it seems like they are making progress. Gee . . . am I being too moderate for you? I'm sorry.

[Classical_Liberal]

16. It looks to me like Bremer is taking advantage of rebuilding for Investers

. Why would he presume the right to privatitize anything if he is just trying to get he country back on its feet?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

20. Once again, governments should not be running business.

The private sector is much better suited to do that.

[Classical_Liberal]

23. The Iraqi people should make the decision whether that is true

I don't presume business to be better able to provide old people with social security, why should Bremer presume anything on the Iraqis behalf? American democracy has a right to run old people pensions, in the form of social security. Or do you have a problem with that? why can't he just leave it the way it is, until the Iraqis can decide since he is trying to bring democracy.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

25. I guess because Bremmer thinks his way is a better way?

I don't have a problem with privatization of business.

[Classical_Liberal]

28. Then what are you doing here?

That isn't a democratic position, small or large D.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

33. Silly rabbit. Since when did capitalism and private ownerhip of

business become something other than "a democratic position, small or large D? Democrats have been some of the strongest proponents of these principles for 50 years.

[Classical_Liberal]

37. Privatizing social security?

No the Democrats haven't been in favor of that, because the American people are against it. Privatizing would be undemocratic in light of the fact that it isn't a position Americans favor. I believe Bremer is acting against the wishes of the Iraqis as well.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

42. I've never, ever, not once, not a single time suggested privatizing SS.

I'm very sorry if I somehow confused you about that. I've never thought that, much less said that. Maybe, you have me confused with another poster.

[Classical_Liberal]

44. Bremer is privatizing the Iraqi social security system

.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

47. Really?

[Classical_Liberal]

49. So you didn't even bother to read the article

.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

51. I said you win. Please stop with your devastating rebuttals.

I will have to shine shoes for a week to get my self-respect back.

[Minstrel Boy]

7. Should a foreign government

dictate another state's industrial policy? Particularly when its own industry will directly benefit from those dictates? That's conflict of interest.

[Redleg]

2. I agree- the Iraqis should have much more say in how business

is done in Iraq. We should be hiring Iraqi firms and contractors to do most of the rebuilding rather than Halliburton and other U.S. based companies.

I also agree that Bush, Inc. doesn't give a good god-damn about 'democracy' in Iraq or anywhere else.

[Classical_Liberal]

4. Iraqi firms would be just as corrupt in governing the country

The people should decide. Not business. Business oligarchies are not democracy, or a substitute for it.

[Redleg]

8. I agree that business oligarchies are not democracy

but also believe it is highly unlikely that the U.S. or governing body in Iraq will permit the people to decide how to structure the economic system in Iraq.

Perhaps we could do what was done in Japan after WWII and insist on strong labor unionization and workplace democracy. That will help keep the business interests under control.

Also, Iraqi firms may not be as corrupt as you think.

[Classical_Liberal]

19. Have you looked at Japan lately

It is not in any way a thriving democracy. They would have kicked the bumbs out long ago over the bubble economy. The Bubble burst ten years ago and has never recovered. They haven't, because we blessed them with our electoral college and in the case of Japan particularly it is an electoral college on steroids.

[Redleg]

24. Japan today is not relevant to my example of post WWII

(Marshall Plan era) Japan.

Also, if you care to re-read my posts, I never advocated U.S. style democratic processes and structures. I did say that strong labor unions and workplace democracy could go a long way to keep businesses from acting in interests at odds with the citizenry.

Do you think the U.S. overseers will permit some kind of worker-owned and centrally planned economy in Iraq?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

26. Not a chance. Worker-owned, centrally planned economies have

never been able to compete with western style capitalism.

[Redleg]

29. There are reasons for that beyond the perceived weaknesses

of socialistic systems. One is that capitalistic systems, such as ours, have done everything in their power to keep non-capitalist systems down. We have tinkered interminably in the economic affairs of nations- rewarding those who welcome our firms and our form of capitalism and punishing those who do not.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

35. Oh, it's our fault that communist systems have produced results

far, far inferior to ours? I'm not ready to make that leap.

[Classical_Liberal]

40. The Western European Social Democracies aren't far inferior

to us.

[Redleg]

45. That is correct- in fact, in some ways they are better than us

but they are not pure socialist sytems, either.

[Redleg]

43. I didn't say that- I tried to imply that we haven't helped them, either.

The Cold War was as much about competing economic systems as it was about competing military systems.

I am not now advocating socialism or pure capitalism.

[Classical_Liberal]

31. I am not in favor of that either. I am in favor of the Iraqis deciding

If we wouldn't want to privatize social security, I doubt they would.

[Redleg]

32. I agree- they should decide through a democratic process.

But as you said, bringing democracy to Iraq is not our real aim for being there.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. WHAT DOES HE THINK IRAQ IS ,

Some kind of democracy?
:nuke:

[thermodynamic]

52. It's absolutely incredible, the Freepers could learn a thing or two

The BBC government controls most of the television channels, yet their programming is much better and doesn't dumb down the audience nearly as much as American television does. The BBC also takes more risks; they've put on programs that would never be ran in America unless the content was either dumbed down or toned down to keep the religious nuts pacified...

The Iraqis must decide for themselves. Just having a big fascist bully stepping in, telling them what to do will likely make them more angry. Especially if they had the resources to see our own recent history.