Opinion: Public or Private systems: Deliver Quality?.
Seems like the “private business model” is touted as “delivering the best products”? Well, that is what they tell us, anyway. Public systems have a tough time competing with them on cost, but, what about quality? Which delivers quality?
I can use a simple example:
news products. Which produces a higher quality product? Some would argue that Fox News delivers a better "informed Republican". And in a funny way, they do, but is that a "quality Republican"?
I guess people assume that “free markets” are designed to deliver quality? Or are “interested” in delivering quality?
No, most “free market” systems are designed to deliver profits to shareholders, at any cost. For example: downsizing "capability of profits".
But, wait, what about "Publicly Traded Companies: stock markets" that "hide secrets", only to "blow up" and investors lose it all? Is that quality?
How much did George Soros pump into GM, when "I bailed" from the Auto Industry?
I will force you to look into it. You will see that, for me, "the game was" up. I left the United States. Good thing. Wondering if I stayed: what my "imaginary Michigan mortgage" would be doing, right now, as I lined up for the "welfare".
I used to argue about innovating our technology, but, the company would not. When I returned to Ontario, it was like seeing "monkeys with sticks" versus the tech-savvy companies in the USA. There is a reason they have high productivity. I could see that many of these places were dead already. Now that is 80% true for my "innovation segment", in Ontario. That is why I went "green", that is a growing segment!
My US company did not see a future in innovation nor investing to do it. I was promoted inside the company to help innovate. After the "establishment" figured it was too hard, even though we designed and assembled a very complex machine, the first time without major headaches. They said no.
Instead, it reorganized using expensive "MBA brats", and then the company eventually failed. Sold to the French. We provided all the advanced flexible manufacturing systems for drive train ( engine blocks, cylinder heads, transmission casings ) and Custom Modular Manufacturing equipment ( Boeing, Air Bus and a guy named "Big Tony" ).
Our company was smart, they had made this, "grow and divide" its business model. They had been doing forever. Made them very rich. Our "segment" was sold off, and the other "segment" became
. My last big projects were: the "blocking line" for Chinas first big car company:
, Advanced Machining System lines for
( Navistar ), and
Advanced Machining Process, eliminating human "error". Dudes, with angle grinders and sometimes hangovers.
The "spin-off" segment, Intermec holds
in an "Intellectual Property Sharing" agreement. Meaning, they share knowledge for mutual benefit! Go figure! Seems like IBM sees the potential in keeping their little "busy beavers" smart, informed and competitive. Makes them more loot!
Imagine if our government were interested in making more tax revenues? Would we benefit? I am not sure.
Do they think "smaller government" will make Canada a flagship country and we will all laugh and play in the streets?
RFID is changing the world, being able to track things in real-time. The US military already uses it, they bought in first! They slap an "RFID tag" on a box with "
" dolls for kids in Iraq, and program the tag with "what is inside the box". You can also monitor remotely, the temperature, speed, shock characteristics and have it display on Google Earth in "real time". good for security and anti-theft. Imagine putting RFID on "politicians budget dollars"? Then we could see whats going on. ;)
Sharing information is important. Now IBM and Intermec are scooping up business like "there is no tomorrow". Why? It reduces costs and improves information for its customers: provides for "instant info.". And hey, technically, there is no tomorrow, because the sun shines on this planet constantly.
Tomorrow is a human
not reality. Reality is science.
Something, I think, Canada's government would dictate to us ( sharing quality information ) as "wasting taxpayer dollars": sharing quality information and empowering us.
Can we trust "private schools" to teach progressive science? Would private schools behave in the "best interests of the students"? No, private models are based on profits, not quality of education.
Am I wrong? Sometimes, if a school has an incredible reputation in science, art, dance, music, cooking, fashion and lifeguarding. People recognize its quality first, not its profitability. Are private schools responsible? You decide. Look at the quality of the product first.
If you had the choice, would you go to the "most recognized school" or "the most profitable"? You decide. What if your parents decide for you? Is that a choice?
Do “free markets” deliver quality? Can “free markets” ever deliver quality? Maybe, if we all had a vote: in government policy and corporate responsibility.
What if governments force corporations to deliver more quality:
Well, that is called a “bailout by the public taxpayer”. But wait, that is not “free markets”! It's another bad investment. Like Canada's stimulus package ( first, was it needed? ), not investing in our futures, but fixing roads and expanding buildings when real estate vacancy is on the rise and driving cars is bad for the environment. "Build it and they will pay". Sounds lucrative.
Good thing we have a free system (
) to learn about things, because governments do not want you to learn about "any of this". It would "scare the 1% that control huge company assets" and jeopardize "global stability".
If governments stop regulation of business, does that deliver "better quality", to you, or "better profits" for corporations?
Today, do you think the governments are public or private? You decide ;)
P.S. - Would Canada be better/worse off, now, without our platform and "history of public systems"? Are they selling my future? They just did, again.