Tired of privatization?

[El Che]

Gee, you don't say!

"Better to be called a red by the rats than a rat by the reds."- Mike Quill

 

[777 fixer]

I never said that....but keep looking to Canada for examples on ways to make our own country better. Personally, I think that a publicly traded company would try it's damndest in the US to get the most out of the fewest people, for the lowest pay. Because NAV Canada, even though it's a private sector company up there in Canada is missing one expense that any private concerns in the US would have....how to pay for the health insurance of those folks that they are hiring to modernize the ATC system. Unless you propose individuals to insure themselves with a GW Bush "Health Savings Account" - which would last how long for a one week stay in the hospital these days?

What a US company that's modernizing the ATC system is paying for health insurance is irrelevant as to whether or not they are successful. What is relevant is how good a job the people, in this case the FAA, who are overseeing it.

I've heard the argument that US companies are at a competitive disadvantage because they have to foot the bill for health insurance. There is a ring of truth to that no doubt. It seems to become more true when a company is having money problems. Take GM for example. You didn’t hear them complaining about health care costs back in the nineties when they were making money off their trucks and SUV's. Just like you probably won't hear executives from Exxon whining too much over it.

Even with this disadvantage there must still be something attractive about the US for foreign companies to set up shop here. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan all have production lines in the US and Kia is building one. I just bought a Bosch dishwasher that was built in the US; it used to be built in Germany.

 

[delldude]

Even with this disadvantage there must still be something attractive about the US for foreign companies to set up shop here. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan all have production lines in the US and Kia is building one. I just bought a Bosch dishwasher that was built in the US; it used to be built in Germany.

I think for the most part its incentives by state and local governments.

 

[KCFlyer]

What a US company that's modernizing the ATC system is paying for health insurance is irrelevant as to whether or not they are successful. What is relevant is how good a job the people, in this case the FAA, who are overseeing it.

Oh...it's relevant all right...with the added costs of health insurance, a US private company is going to want controller to work as many hours a week as they can, for as little money as they can so that the company can show a profit. NAV Canada has a big chunk of liability off their balance sheet right from the start, allowing the to focus perhaps a little more on a quality producut.

Even with this disadvantage there must still be something attractive about the US for foreign companies to set up shop here. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan all have production lines in the US and Kia is building one. I just bought a Bosch dishwasher that was built in the US; it used to be built in Germany.

As Dell pointed out...most of those companies didn't build the plant they are in....the state or town they are in did. Most of those companies have so many exemptions from local taxes because the city fathers were concerned about "creating jobs". The part of that story is this...the local tax burden falls on the backs of the citizens...not the corporation. The citizens end up footing the bill for this "job creation" program via higher taxes in their community.

 

[delldude]

Case in point:

US Air was all set to have a nice shiny new maintenance facility in PIT,all the Fed,State and Locals lined up tripping over each other for funding to pay for it.....U was floundering,Davey Seigel threw his ten cents in....United weighed in with their merger and promises then Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall.And the rest is BK history.But the incentives and intent were there.Big time.

 

[777 fixer]

Oh...it's relevant all right...with the added costs of health insurance, a US private company is going to want controller to work as many hours a week as they can, for as little money as they can so that the company can show a profit. NAV Canada has a big chunk of liability off their balance sheet right from the start, allowing the to focus perhaps a little more on a quality producut.

I want you to show me how the FAA's failure to modernize the ATC system is somehow related to what companies are paying for health insurance.

 

[KCFlyer]

I want you to show me how the FAA's failure to modernize the ATC system is somehow related to what companies are paying for health insurance.

That isn't what I said. I said that a PRIVATE American company that would take over the TC system, like Nav Canada would not develop a system like that in Canada because they would be too focused on keeping costs down because they would be providing health care coverage to their employees, unlike the NAV Canada folks, who do not have to factor in health care costs as a part of modernizing their system.

 

[777 fixer]

As Dell pointed out...most of those companies didn't build the plant they are in....the state or town they are in did. Most of those companies have so many exemptions from local taxes because the city fathers were concerned about "creating jobs". The part of that story is this...the local tax burden falls on the backs of the citizens...not the corporation. The citizens end up footing the bill for this "job creation" program via higher taxes in their community.

Who do think shoulders the tax burden for the health care systems in Canada and Europe?

 

[777 fixer]

That isn't what I said. I said that a PRIVATE American company that would take over the TC system, like Nav Canada would not develop a system like that in Canada because they would be too focused on keeping costs down because they would be providing health care coverage to their employees, unlike the NAV Canada folks, who do not have to factor in health care costs as a part of modernizing their system.

Are you trying to argue that becasue of health care cost concerns an inferior system would be developed? You think the FAA is concerened with health care costs? No they are not and yet all they have done is create a big mess.

 

[KCFlyer]

Are you trying to argue that becasue of health care cost concerns an inferior system would be developed? You think the FAA is concerened with health care costs? No they are not and yet all they have done is create a big mess.

No 777...I'll type slower. YOU said that maybe we should privatize the ATC system and get a system like NAV Canada. I said that the big difference between American privatization and Canadian privatization is that American privatization would shoulder a burden that NAV Canada did not - health care costs. As a result, I think that for an American company to privatize the ATC system would result in cost cutting in other areas, resulting in a less than superior system.

 

[777 fixer]

No 777...I'll type slower. YOU said that maybe we should privatize the ATC system and get a system like NAV Canada. I said that the big difference between American privatization and Canadian privatization is that American privatization would shoulder a burden that NAV Canada did not - health care costs. As a result, I think that for an American company to privatize the ATC system would result in cost cutting in other areas, resulting in a less than superior system.

Now it's my trun to type slowly. Could you provide actual evidence that a privatized system in the US would be "less superior".

 

[KCFlyer]

Now it's my trun to type slowly. Could you provide actual evidence that a privatized system in the US would be "less superior".

Sure...they would have several million in health care costs that they are shouldering. They will have to cut costs somewhere. Otherwise, it will end up costing MORE than it does with the government running it. Because "investors" no longer care about the quality of the product or service provided, just as long as they get a nice boost on the stock price. High cost operations haven't been very stockholder friendly.

 

[UAL_TECH]

A totally unfettered free market system ‘does not work’! (No BS, SHOW ME!)View attachment 7802

If you ‘believe’ in the ‘laze fair’ free market bull$#### then why would one recommend ‘regulation’? :blink:

To recommend regulation would admit that ‘privatization’ in the pure form, is flawed (DUH!!!).

I do not know about everyone else here, but I am getting tired of being bent over. :down:

OK, if we are an unfettered ‘free market’ and ‘globalized’ society; then take the US Constitution, flag and all the ‘associated’ baggage and flush it!

If none of you ‘remember’ the Social Security program was on the block to be ‘privatized’. Of course, that was when the market was on the ‘up-tick’. Now it is not even being discussed (for now).

You know what?

As a VET, Union ‘activist’, Neighbor, and Friend; I wish you ‘all’ the best of luck, but I am not going to beat my head against the wall any longer.View attachment 7803

B) xUT

 

[KCFlyer]

Who do think shoulders the tax burden for the health care systems in Canada and Europe?

It isn't these companies.

 

[777 fixer]

I may be a socialist but I think all of our natural resources should be nationalized. Lease them back to the private sector and allow them to make a reasonable profit and the rest goes back to the people.

Recently on the nightly news there was a story about oil drilling in South Dakota. For a long time drilling there was prohibitively expensive. Mainly due to the technology needed and the low cost of oil. Now with advances in oil drilling technology and the price of oil being high it has become profitable to drill there.

This means farmers who happen to own that land are getting some hefty royalty checks. We have all read stories about farmers barely making it or getting wiped out due to drought or flood. With the money they are getting they can sleep a bit easier at night. The question I have to ask do you think the government should come in and "nationalize" their land?