Has Capitalism Met the Marxist Utopia?

antrobus

onlyroz wrote: »

Fine if it is the best. But there are plenty of examples of utter fiascos when private suppliers have been used to implement public services (e.g. Universal Credit, or the scandals with Serco and G4S etc).

There are also plenty of utter fiascos when public suppliers have been used to implement public services. Mid-Staffordshire springs to mind.

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

Why not? If the best outcome is from a private supplier, I'd like to buy that. My child's education is far too important to be subjected to ideologues. Similarly when I got cancer I got the best treatment I could, not the best public or private treatment.

Is it the best http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11043262/Safety-of-private-hospitals-questioned-as-report-reveals-hundreds-die-unexpectedly.html

antrobus

onlyroz wrote: »

I am arguing that there are certain core functions that should not be run at a profit, ....

Why not?

You have to place some value on the outputs, and compare them to the cost of the inputs, in order to be able to work out whether or not what you are doing is actually worth doing.

Note that this is the case irrespective of whether you are talking about a public or private sector entity.

onlyroz wrote: »

....and we should ensure that people are not limited in their ambitions by their backgrounds.

That's not an economic issue.

Generali

ukcarper wrote: »

Is it the best http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11043262/Safety-of-private-hospitals-questioned-as-report-reveals-hundreds-die-unexpectedly.html

What do you think heathcare outcomes are like in poor countries for the vast majority?

Capitalism has delivered the British economy the ability to treat its sick people. Many poorer, non-Capitalist countries would love for a few hundred extra deaths compared to what would be expected in a country like Britain.

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

What do you think heathcare outcomes are like in poor countries for the vast majority?

Capitalism has delivered the British economy the ability to treat its sick people. Many poorer, non-Capitalist countries would love for a few hundred extra deaths compared to what would be expected in a country like Britain.

The point I was making is are you getting better care in private hospitals in UK or just getting it quicker.

Generali

ukcarper wrote: »

The point I was making is are you getting better care in private hospitals in UK or just getting it quicker.

Ok. It's a very long way off topic as a point.

Generali

onlyroz wrote: »

Fine if it is the best. But there are plenty of examples of utter fiascos when private suppliers have been used to implement public services (e.g. Universal Credit, or the scandals with Serco and G4S etc).

Yes there are. The Capitalist system as a whole has given riches to the poorest in the UK that I suspect Marx would find incredible.

ukcarper

How many of the benefits the poor have gained in the UK would be here if the capitalism had not been softened by more left leaning governments.

Generali

ukcarper wrote: »

How many of the benefits the poor have gained in the UK would be here if the capitalism had not been softened by more left leaning governments.

Given that the poorest in Capitalist countries are richer than the average in non-Capitalist countries I think it's fair to say that outcomes for the poorest would still be better in Capitalist countries.

The average income for the poorest 10% in the UK is greater than the average income for all Chinese for example.

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

Given that the poorest in Capitalist countries are richer than the average in non-Capitalist countries I think it's fair to say that outcomes for the poorest would still be better in Capitalist countries.

The average income for the poorest 10% in the UK is greater than the average income for all Chinese for example.

Is that true of all capitalist countries for instance is South Africa a capitalist country.