Which Sector is more important, Public or Private?

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
I was trying to figure out which sector is actually more important, the public or private sector?

Leaving Government aside.....

If we had no private sector then all services would be provided by the state, Which runs a perpetual budget deficit system. It would be pointless having a income tax system because you would have to borrow the money, to pay staff, then pay back interest on the money, after you'd witheld this 'tax' from your employees. After a few years the deficit would be huge. So when you borrow more every year to keep this system going, then economically, a system such as this makes zero sense.
The cost of the public service is a huge economic burden on our country.

If we had no public sector, then all of the services would have to be provided by the private sector. Not so bad as the private sector has to run a budget surplus system or go out of business in time. The extra money the private sector brings in can be taxed.
There is no profit to be had from looking after anybody who cannot pay for essential services themselves. Whether it be health, public transport, whatever The poor and the sick would suffer.
The cost of the private sector is a huge social burden on our country.

On balance what is the best solution?

It is clear the only feasible and possible solution that is both economically and socially fair is to have a public service that runs a budget surplus.

If the government gets tax from the private sector and invests it to fund public services that would ultimately generate profit, then the vulnerable can still be looked after by the state AND we have a profitable Private sector with very little social burden in Ireland.

So it is time the government rethinks how we do business and aims for budget surpluses instead of budget deficits.

Why do we assume we have to work on a deficit system?
 
Last edited:


EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
Which is more important, your arms or your legs?
Your brain, try using it. And stop trying to derail a thread, thanks.
 

mido

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
3,355
then get ruari quinn back as finance minister
 

Raketemensch

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
3,075
Trolltastic thread to try to get people fighting. As if there weren't enough of that already.

FAIL
 

TaxHavenSite

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2010
Messages
388
Having a society where the private and public sector work in harmony,is the best way to go.

As for the deficit,why does every nation think you need to spend more then what you take in? Get rid of the inefficiency in govt and i bet Ireland would have a surplus.
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
Trolltastic thread to try to get people fighting. As if there weren't enough of that already.

FAIL
No the question is Why do we assume we have to work on a budget deficit system, instead of a budget surplus system you imbecile.

Simple question for consideration.

'You' don't have to contribute if you dont wish to.
 

charley

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
1,247
If the public sector adopted private sector practices such as not paying too much for services and sacking anyone who isn't up to their jobs. The closing down or selling off of unproductive departments. Then things might be different
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
Having a society where the private and public sector work in harmony,is the best way to go.

As for the deficit,why does every nation think you need to spend more then what you take in? Get rid of the inefficiency in govt and i bet Ireland would have a surplus.
That is the point I am trying to get at. Neither sector, operating exclusively, would make for a nice country to live in.

But the current arrangement is not great and we need to look at the reasons why. Unmanageable Sovereign debt cannot ever lead to a truly free society of any kind.

It would be nice to live in a country that was not socially and economically as dysfunctional as this one.
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
I had to switch it off to read your first post, it was like reading a 13 year olds civic's essay.
Great, you followed it then. I'm glad as I was thinking of you when I wrote it.
 

Raketemensch

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
3,075
No the question is Why do we assume we have to work on a budget deficit system, instead of a budget surplus system you imbecile.

Simple question for consideration.

'You' don't have to contribute if you dont wish to.
Thanks. Great thread, it's generating some excellent debate
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
Thanks. Great thread, it's generating some excellent debate
Your first post was 'Trolltastic thread to try to get people fighting. As if there weren't enough of that already.

FAIL'

You raised some good points there, did you not?
But still never addressed the initial question. Some posters have tried to engage in a debate. Some have not.
You are the latter.
It is Ironic that you refer to the standard of 'debate' on this thread when none of your posts debate any of the points raised.
 

Telemachus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
6,480
Website
en.wikipedia.org
If we had a pure private sector state, im sure you would need a state mechanism to protect it as some of the private businesses might monopolise their own areas of expertise. Like we have seen with microsofts attempts to monopolise the internet browser market.
 

hmmm

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
2,831
I'll try parsing your first paragraph

If we had no private sector then all services would be provided by the state, Which runs a perpetual budget deficit system.
A perpetual what? Says who?
It would be pointless having a income tax system because you would have to borrow the money, to pay staff, then pay back interest on the money, after you'd witheld this 'tax' from your employees.
Err, yes. Your public sector doesn't need taxes, it owns everything
After a few years the deficit would be huge.
Err yes, if you keep borrowing.
So when you borrow more every year to keep this system going, then economically, a system such as this makes zero sense.
You think so?
The cost of the public service is a huge economic burden on our country.
And this absurd scenario allows you to come to this conclusion?
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
I'll try parsing your first paragraph...
And this absurd scenario allows you to come to this conclusion?
Both the exclusive public and the exclusive private sector scenarios are hypothetical scenarios.
The obvious conclusions drawn are based on Hypothetical scenarios.

The practical and sustainable economic and social solution lies somewhere in between the conclusions drawn. The point of the thread is simply to discuss a solution.

It helps to read things in the context in which they're meant.
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,664
If we had a pure private sector state, im sure you would need a state mechanism to protect it as some of the private businesses might monopolise their own areas of expertise. Like we have seen with microsofts attempts to monopolise the internet browser market.
Agreed. And it would be great if the state mechanisms figured out a way to deliver this protection profitably, by providing services for a fee on the open market.
 

Goban Saor

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
925
We don't need a public sector. We should privatise the whole lot.

100% agree.

If we had a pure private sector state, im sure you would need a state mechanism to protect it as some of the private businesses might monopolise their own areas of expertise. Like we have seen with microsofts attempts to monopolise the internet browser market.
But Microsoft doesnt have a monopoly.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top