Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utcs!mnetor!fred
From: fred@mnetor.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Nationalization/Crown Corps.
Message-ID: <1141@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Jul-85 16:33:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.1141
Posted: Wed Jul  3 16:33:25 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 17:25:50 EDT
References: <1121@ubc-cs.UUCP> <1110@mnetor.UUCP> <720@utcs.UUCP> <1114@mnetor.UUCP> <183@watmum.UUCP> <1131@mnetor.UUCP> <729@utcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: fred@mnetor.UUCP (Fred Williams)
Distribution: can
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 46
Summary: 

In article <729@utcs.UUCP> clarke@utcs.UUCP (Jim Clarke) writes:
>Umm, well maybe that's something wrong with free enterprise.  It seems to
>produce profits nicely, but it doesn't care much about anything else.
>
	It doesn't *have* to care because "supply & demand" is a natural
law. Everything else falls into place.  True, there is a noise factor
that may leave the occasional person feeling poorly done by, but most of
these cases can be shown to be the person's own fault. People have to
be prepared to make their own luck, and accept the consequences of
their actions. The world does not owe us a living!

	Yes, There have been bail-outs of private corporations, and in
the case of Chrysler, (in the US), it proved to be the right
decision.  Generally, however, I am against bail-outs because it
only supports the status quo in a company that has already proven
itself to be a looser. As far as the loss of jobs, this will no
doubt take place in the short term. Long term consequences will be
better if the corporation in question is left to die because if the
market for the product still exists, someone will fill that market.
Another company will form and hire the people laid off. The workers
may form a cooperative and fill the market themselves. What I'm
saying is, -A free economy takes care of itself naturally, and
it is hard to improve on mother nature.

	Examples of individual companies being supported when they are
not able to efficiently serve their market are numerous;
	- Canadair		-DeHavilland
But individual examples are not worth much when analyzing the
system of government, or the approaches used by various governments.
If we compare the total results, the standards of living achieved,
we get a good measure of the efficiency of those systems and 
approaches. Frankly I think we're a lot better off than the
communist countries. 

	Survival of the fittest is another natural law and it applies
to business without loss of validity. Supporting a company that would
otherwise die is an attempt to defeat this law. The result is that
we have a lot of sick & lame companies behaving as leaches on the
economy of the nation. Bailing them out draws them under government
control and this is very attractive to the "empire builders" in the
civil service "priesthood". They are the ones who benefit on the
backs of all the rest of us who pay taxes.

Cheers,		Fred Williams