About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

NYS for sale? How about Mass? Minnesota? Yeah-- that too!
Author: Raine    Date: 12/29/2008 13:36:20

Private lottery, private water, private roads, private bridges. States are seriously considering the idea of selling off our infrastructure to the highest bidder. Where would that leave the massive economic stimulus package that PE Obama is suggesting? He has suggested that in order to get Americans back to work we should be investing in our infrastructure... not privatizing it.
GOP lawmakers are pushing to privatize the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and the state lottery. Both steps require a higher authority — federal legislation in the case of the airport, a voter-approved constitutional amendment for the lottery. But one lawmaker estimated an airport deal could bring in at least $2.5 billion, and the lottery $500 million.

Massachusetts lawmakers are considering putting the Massachusetts Turnpike in private hands. That could bring in upfront money to help with a $1.4 billion deficit, while also saving on highway operating costs.
In New York, Democratic Gov. David Paterson appointed a commission to look into leasing state assets, including the Tappan Zee Bridge north of New York City, the lottery, golf courses, toll roads, parks and beaches. Recommendations are expected next month.

Such projects could be attractive to private investors and public pension funds looking for safe places to put their money in this scary economy, said Leonard Gilroy, a privatization expert with the market-oriented Reason Foundation in Los Angeles.

"Infrastructure is more attractive today than ever," Gilroy said. "It's tangible. It's a road. It's water. It's an airport. It's something that is — you know, you hear the term recession-proof."
For the past 8 years I have watched what privatization has done to our military. It's been great for investors, terrible for our soldiers.

I have seen companies go unregulated making billions of dollars for CEO's while the company itself fell apart. For the past few months we have heard the mantra of privatize the profits and socialize the losses. Think I'm kidding? Take this quote from the article:
"You're privatizing some profits in this process and socializing some losses," Price said.

Without real and serious change, how would this benefit any state in the long run? Who is going to ensure that any of this contracts will be given in an open and honest way? Do we have to worry about no-bid contracts?

What next? selling off our State houses to the the highest bidder for sponsorship? I worry. I am concerned that in our dark economic times, those we elected to manage our states are becoming perhaps penny wise and pound foolish. Rebuilding our economies should not be about the best investment for people on Wall Street, it should be about the best investment for the good people out of work on Main street. It would be nice if Washington would think about bailing out our states. A 1.4 billion Dollar deficit is NOTHING compared to the money that AIG got... at least we would see the returns on a state investment.

Plus, the added benefit would be that people would actually be making money to pay for the bills, thereby making banks happy because they would not foreclose so much, and end up owning so many empty houses. It all seems so logical. One of the best ways to jumpstart an economy is to keep roofs over people heads and get them back to work.

I almost forgot about Union Labor. Do you really think that once a company takes over the Tappan Zee Bridge (and the like) , those people that maintain that bridge will remain union laborers? Somehow, I don't think so.

If you think that privatizing our States is a good thing in the long term... I've got this bridge in Brooklyn...

:peace: and
Raine

 

96 comments (Latest Comment: 12/30/2008 04:59:19 by Raine)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati