Location: Aylmer (Gatineau) across the river from Ottawa
Posts: 16,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by i-rui
isn't the federal government adding over 2000+ new cells?.....plus more provincial jails are being built as we speak.
i think it's a bit too early to tell what the real cost of the bill will be. The thing was just passed a few months ago.
Link? and if so it would address an already existing over population problem or do you want to have your cake and eat it too and just keep on double bunking and then bitch about that....?
Link?
__________________
WARNING: If you see links to ads in the above post, blame the ad-linking software used by the owners of this website. I do not endorse these links. Don't click on them.
and if so it would address an already existing over population problem or do you want to have your cake and eat it too and just keep on double bunking and then bitch about that....?
lol, it seems you're the one who wants to have his cake and eat it too. they aren't building new cells to alleviate double-bunking, they're building more cells to fill them up.
Quote:
And even as he reiterated his commitment to building 2,700 new cells in existing prison facilities, he said those additional units aren’t meant to alleviate the pressures caused by double-bunking – because there’s no need.
lol, it seems you're the one who wants to have his cake and eat it too. they aren't building new cells to alleviate double-bunking, they're building more cells to fill them up.
Like I said... you will just want to bitch about double bunking, cause it means they aren't building the new prisons you claimed they would be building.... 2000+ new cells for a population of 33+ million and that is an issue for you? Really?
Why?
__________________
WARNING: If you see links to ads in the above post, blame the ad-linking software used by the owners of this website. I do not endorse these links. Don't click on them.
Sort of works like this in the US. Somehow when governments partner up with business it becomes a scam and taxpayers are left on the hook. Might have something to do with the buddies of the politicos getting the contracts.
__________________ ~WARNING: If you see links to ads in the above post, blame the cheesy ad-linking software used by the owners of this website. These ad links were inserted without either my direct or implied permission. I do not endorse these links. Don't click on them.~
Do NOT Touch this computer!!! Touching this computer WILL cause irreversible brain damage.
Sort of works like this in the US. Somehow when governments partner up with business it becomes a scam and taxpayers are left on the hook. Might have something to do with the buddies of the politicos getting the contracts.
of course there are scams when the public service runs things, we have plenty of examples of it. Just as there are scams when the private sector runs things. But the myth here is that somehow privatization suddenly means no scams and cheaper. Especially when there are plenty of examples of privatizations resulting in reduced service, huge cost over runs and certainly plenty of scams, all of which we as tax payers are still on the hook for.
I think both options are equally valid and should be weighed. But to suggest privatization will solve budget problems generally speaking is simply incorrect imo.
The big issues to me are that privatization necessarily increases the cost by whatever profit margin the company running it is making, and that private companies cannot be required to provide public account of their actions.
Government-run institutions are notoriously inefficient and opaque, but these are problems that can, at least in principle, be fixed. The public can and should demand public institutions be efficient and transparent. Only shareholders can make these requirements of corporations.
My preference is for most products and services to be provided by competing private ventures with appropriate government oversight to prevent collusion, ensure standards compliance, and protect labour and the environment, etc., because if you don't like the way a certain company runs its business, you're free to not deal with them. But for essential services like health care, police, military, fire, and sadly necessary things like correctional institutions, privatization is not a viable alternative.
The big issues to me are that privatization necessarily increases the cost by whatever profit margin the company running it is making, and that private companies cannot be required to provide public account of their actions.
Government-run institutions are notoriously inefficient and opaque, but these are problems that can, at least in principle, be fixed. The public can and should demand public institutions be efficient and transparent. Only shareholders can make these requirements of corporations.
They demand it frequently. However, it's so large that the public service is more powerful than the governments elected. The inefficiency is now built in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryanc
My preference is for most products and services to be provided by competing private ventures with appropriate government oversight to prevent collusion, ensure standards compliance, and protect labour and the environment, etc. But for essential services like health care, police, military, fire, and sadly necessary things like correctional institutions, privatization is not a viable alternative.
I believe they should be privatized because they are essential. Too important to be left to bumbling governments. Government is better at hag-riding private providers than providing services itself
__________________
"My life is my own."
Mac Pro 3.0 GHz, Intel Mac Mini 1.83 GHz, 2.16 GHz White MacBook, G4 14" 1.33 GHz iBook, G4 12" 768 MHz laptop,
I believe they should be privatized because they are essential. Too important to be left to bumbling governments. Government is better at hag-riding private providers than providing services itself
I don't dispute the historical validity of your criticisms of government; but I seen no reason this is an inherent problem of public institutions. Rather than just throwing our hands in the air and saying "let the private sector handle it... we can trust them..." we should work on and demand improvement from our public institutions.
Unfortunately, our current federal government, despite having run on a platform of accountability, transparency and efficiency, have demonstrated themselves to be the most secretive bunch of pork-barelling, back-room dealing, scoundrels we've ever had to deal with. Their answer to the problem of accountability is to get rid of the accountants; soon we'll have the most fact-free government in history.
Linear Mode
