Fixing Holes

To the Editor ( March 21, 2011 )

I was inspired after reading J. Donelle’s letter “Fixing the budget problem” March 14. If a real solution is desired serious steps must be taken. If we don’t want to “be in this place” what direction shall we go in? Basically there are two camps of thought to consider. Both are founded on well argued political-economic theory.

Camp A – from the idea that the public and private sectors are NOT the same; business and government are not similar entities they do not have the same goals and so should not be following the same mode of operation. The state should not be run like a business. But why not? Corporations seem to be great models for success (never mind the automakers crash and bank failures of a few years ago)

According to Camp A, the state exists for the safety and welfare of its citizens. All its services aim to provide the best possible standard of living for the greatest number of people. To accomplish this, the state needs income of course. However collecting and spending said income is NOT the prime motive of the state. A business exist to generate wealth for its owners, all other considerations even providing service to its clients are secondary. Camp A theory claims; a state must exist to provide service to its people.

Thus I read B. L. Crowley’s article “Provinces behaving badly” March 15, with interest. The behavior he condemns; NFLD nationalizing AbitibiBowater, is exactly what we may expect to see under the logic of Camp A. The notion of democracy does mean that governments have the right to seize property, or even default on debts, if they think it is in the public interest.

Camp B – comes from the idea that business and government can and should be run according to similar methods. The state should be run like a corporation. In this regard a balanced budget, with surplus if possible, becomes the prime motive of actions. The state must still provide some services but these are seen as problematic, expenses to be cut whenever possible. However the government faces a situation no business ever wants to deal with. Many of the services it provides are impossible to measure in terms of cost – benefit.

According to Camp B theory the size and expenses of government must be reduced, opening the door of privatization. It would be foolish to downsize the government yet expect it to continue covering all current areas of responsibility. So anything that can be sub-contracted or entirely given to corporations should be.

Thus I get to R. Austin’s letter “Casual workers seek respect” March 15, and his worry about the treatment of some civil service workers. Despite the creation of a casual workers union which gave members seniority, new workers were hired without offering the jobs to laid off union members. In many businesses it is common practice to prefer new employees instead of allowing workers to climb the ladder, gaining increased wages and benefits. My point is; this behavior is exactly what we can expect from Camp B. At the extreme such a society would have almost all workers being hired on individual short term contract basis.

Both camps have their attractive and ugly aspects. What we have to ask is; what place do we want to be in 20 years down the road?

Think about it.