Page 1 of 2
#2
Bad idea: they would be profit driven...
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#3
Quote by Kensai
Bad idea: they would be profit driven...

Bad idea; encouraging vigilantism(sp?) would be cheaper still. Except in the large increase in cases of people being beaten with sacks full of doorknobs.
#4
Most police forces are target driven anyway aren't they?
What is this that stands before me?

Figure in black that points at me...


FUCKETH THINE SELF
#6
Hopefully this will be met with a lot of opposition. I mean the NHS reforms have been fought over for a year now and they're a lot less obviously wrong than this.

I doubt highly that anything will happen, but **** me if it does.
#7
Quote by Kensai
Bad idea: they would be profit driven...

Doesn't have to be bad.
It could create more incentives for employees of such security firms to work harder than normal policemen.
#8
"victim support". wtf is that? if you get robbed in england, the police assume you did it as a scam and threaten to arrest you.
Quote by Meths

I don't think any words should be censored.

Especially faggot since homos aren't real people and all.

Quote by sam b
Man City wont win anything and finish below Arsenal.

city: 3rd + FA cup winners.
arsenal: 4th
#9
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Doesn't have to be bad.
It could create more incentives for employees of such security firms to work harder than normal policemen.

It could also make them more susceptible to corruption and being bribed by News International.
#10
Terrible idea. I hold a libertarian stance on many agencies and services, but law enforcement and courts should be always be state run. Human rights should not be manipulated by wall street, like the prison industry in the United States...
#11
That's not even possible in a normal democracy. The people who enforce the law are supposed to be neutral, and not driven by anything other than the law. This is officially the worst idea I've heard this year.
#12
Quote by slapsymcdougal
It could also make them more susceptible to corruption and being bribed by News International.

How are people in private sectors more susceptible to corruption than people in government agencies?
There are many countries with corrupt government bodies.
Last edited by Tangerineseeker at Mar 3, 2012,
#13
Quote by Tangerineseeker
How are people in private sectors more susceptible to corruption than people in government agencies?
There are many countries with corrupt government bodies.

There are also a lot of people being killed at this very moment, but that doesn't mean you would want to be one of them.
#14
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Doesn't have to be bad.
It could create more incentives for employees of such security firms to work harder than normal policemen.

yeah, that's what will happen. Nothing untoward at all.

In a fixed income situation (I can only hope it's fixed income) the drive will be to cut costs not improve services. It might make people work harder in that 4 people might be expected to do a job the 5 people did last time, but that's not necessarily a good thing.

People aren't going to just work harder because they're in the private sector.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#15
Quote by Tangerineseeker
How are people in private sectors more susceptible to corruption than people in government agencies?
There are many countries with corrupt government bodies.

And the UK is one of the countries with a not-quite-as-corrupt as some other governments.
We're not perfect, but we're not Ghana either.
#16
Quote by slapsymcdougal
And the UK is one of the countries with a not-quite-as-corrupt as some other governments.
We're not perfect, but we're not Ghana either.


In the UK you have Police, in Soviet Ghana we have drugs.
What is this that stands before me?

Figure in black that points at me...


FUCKETH THINE SELF
#17
This is fucking insane. They've also privatised the forensic service.


Privatisation (like this) isn't even how genuine libertarians think it should be run. This just creates monopolies. There's no actual competition because only one company is ever awarded the fucking contract. The British government is a scam. Whitehall is so institutionally corrupt that it's practically unfixable.

Get out while you can Scotland. Secession ftw.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#18
^ This.
What is this that stands before me?

Figure in black that points at me...


FUCKETH THINE SELF
#19
I was mostly just trying to show that Kensai's post was ignorant and that just because something is profit driven doesn't have to make it bad...
For example if there are several private firms that could do the job instead of just one government agency, then there would be more competition. So if a private firm was hired, then that firm would be under pressure to work hard(better service) because it could be replaced by another private firm. If it is merely the normal police then they do not have that kind of pressure or not to that extent.
#20
Quote by magnus_maximus
Literally Fascism if this goes ahead.


No it isn't.

However, this is still a stupid idea. Aside from opening the doors to profit driven security agencies, it also wouldn't solve anything: it wouldn't fix the economy or cut police costs in any significant way; it wouldn't increase the job market in any significant way and it would be a step backwards in civil rights. The police need to stop burying the heads in the sand when it comes to providing the service they're hired for, and then maybe, if they're working a full capacity and still not able to get the job done, privatisation would be an option - although, I daresay education would be a better solution.

I fail to understand the government. Who the hell thinks it's wrong to increase tax on the middle and upper classes, but thinks it's okay to reduce the wages of public sector workers, demolish their pension schemes and infringe civil liberties?
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
#21
Quote by Tangerineseeker
I was mostly just trying to show that Kensai's post was ignorant and that just because something is profit driven doesn't have to make it bad...
For example if there are several private firms that could do the job instead of just one government agency, then there would be more competition. So if a private firm was hired, then that firm would be under pressure to work hard(better service) because it could be replaced by another private firm. If it is merely the normal police then they do not have that kind of pressure or not to that extent.

in this instance it is a bad thing.

The fact that you didn't get the context of the comment is your fault.

If there are several private firms competing that just leads to a race to the bottom as there's no room for extra income only lower costs. Better service for same cost won't increase profit at all. As I said, people aren't going to just work harder because they're in the private sector.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#22
this is pretty scary.

stuff just seems to be getting more ****ed up. I'm predicting more summer riots.
now extra flamey
#23
Sounds like probably a bad idea to me. Accountability and motives get even more hazy with private companies in fields such as this
My God, it's full of stars!
#24
Quote by Lemoninfluence
in this instance it is a bad thing.

The fact that you didn't get the context of the comment is your fault.

If there are several private firms competing that just leads to a race to the bottom as there's no room for extra income only lower costs. Better service for same cost won't increase profit at all. As I said, people aren't going to just work harder because they're in the private sector.


The fact that I didn't get the context of which comment?

I never said that profit would be increased.
I merely said that generally when there is competition in a market the service is better than in a market that is a monopoly.
And I think it is easier to provide incentives for people in private sectors than in government agencies.
#25
Quote by Tangerineseeker

And I think it is easier to provide incentives for people in private sectors than in government agencies.


Yeah that's pretty true haha. Governments aren't worth shit when it comes to good pay and incentives...
My God, it's full of stars!
#28
Quote by Tangerineseeker
The fact that I didn't get the context of which comment?

I never said that profit would be increased.
I merely said that generally when there is competition in a market the service is better than in a market that is a monopoly.
And I think it is easier to provide incentives for people in private sectors than in government agencies.

Kensai's

and although you don't say anything about increasing profits that's what's on the mind of a profit driven entity.

competition does increase service (sometimes) in industry/commerce, however this is neither. This is a public service. There's no extra money to be gained by improving service. Only by cutting costs. Of course obtaining the money is important in the first place but that's all just a show. Just like elections.

Not to mention it's still a monopoly for however long the contract lasts.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#29
Quote by Lemoninfluence
Kensai's

and although you don't say anything about increasing profits that's what's on the mind of a profit driven entity.

competition does increase service (sometimes) in industry/commerce, however this is neither. This is a public service. There's no extra money to be gained by improving service. Only by cutting costs. Of course obtaining the money is important in the first place but that's all just a show. Just like elections.

Not to mention it's still a monopoly for however long the contract lasts.


Yeah but the firms would only be able to stay in business if they provide a good service. If they would fail to do so they would lose their contract.

But they could also increase their profits if they would give out more fines (assuming that the government would share parts of the fine with them) and to give out more fines they would have to patrol more and enforce the law more. Of course this could result in fake fines or an increase in frauds.
#30
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Yeah but the firms would only be able to stay in business if they provide a good service. If they would fail to do so they would lose their contract.

But they could also increase their profits if they would give out more fines (assuming that the government would share parts of the fine with them) and to give out more fines they would have to patrol more and enforce the law more. Of course this could result in fake fines or an increase in frauds.

Well, which one would be cheaper? Fake fines(because noone in the private sector has ever claimed to have done work they didn't), or actually doing more work?
#31
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Yeah but the firms would only be able to stay in business if they provide a good service. If they would fail to do so they would lose their contract.

not really.

These firms aren't created in order to get these police contracts (at least not yet hopefully) they're pre-existing firms with the experience and resources to take on the challenge. This means they'll have other contracts already at hand.

Once they've got the contract it's easy money and they don't have to do anything.

But they could also increase their profits if they would give out more fines (assuming that the government would share parts of the fine with them) and to give out more fines they would have to patrol more and enforce the law more. Of course this could result in fake fines or an increase in frauds.

which is why I've been stating that I hope it's a fixed income.

Otherwise we've made a breakthrough in retardification.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#33
Quote by Lemoninfluence
not really.

These firms aren't created in order to get these police contracts (at least not yet hopefully) they're pre-existing firms with the experience and resources to take on the challenge. This means they'll have other contracts already at hand.

Once they've got the contract it's easy money and they don't have to do anything.

Well I would think that the public and the government would enforce enough pressure on those firms to not simply make easy money.
Also I think the government would have the power/right to terminate contracts with firms if they do not properly do their job and hire other firms instead.

But yeah it really doesn't seem like a very smart move to privatize parts of the police, I gotta admit.
#34
Quote by Tangerineseeker
Well I would think that the public and the government would enforce enough pressure on those firms to not simply make easy money.
Also I think the government would have the power/right to terminate contracts with firms if they do not properly do their job and hire other firms instead.

But yeah it really doesn't seem like a very smart move to privatize parts of the police, I gotta admit.

Not confident; government and business are far too apt to cosy up to each other, and not just when the government are Tories.
#35
I saw this on the news earlier. It's ****ing terrifying.
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
#36
Quote by Tangerineseeker
I was mostly just trying to show that Kensai's post was ignorant and that just because something is profit driven doesn't have to make it bad...
For example if there are several private firms that could do the job instead of just one government agency, then there would be more competition. So if a private firm was hired, then that firm would be under pressure to work hard(better service) because it could be replaced by another private firm. If it is merely the normal police then they do not have that kind of pressure or not to that extent.


Yes, thank you, we understood why people believe competition improves things.


When privatisation contracts are signed, that's not actually how it's done. Generally you can't terminate the contract without compensation i.e. you literally pay the company to go away because it's doing such a bad job.

That's in the event that any contracts are terminated, which they rarely are. Contracts are universally awarded to the company that charges the lowest i.e. the one that provides the worst, most basic service. Private contracting in this country is a scam. We pay extraordinary rates of tax which then goes directly into the pockets of millionaires who make a profit from performing public services. This country is a joke.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#37
Quote by Meths
Yes, thank you, we understood why people believe competition improves things.


When privatisation contracts are signed, that's not actually how it's done. Generally you can't terminate the contract without compensation i.e. you literally pay the company to go away because it's doing such a bad job.

That's in the event that any contracts are terminated, which they rarely are. Contracts are universally awarded to the company that charges the lowest i.e. the one that provides the worst, most basic service. Private contracting in this country is a scam. We pay extraordinary rates of tax which then goes directly into the pockets of millionaires who make a profit from performing public services. This country is a joke.

Sadly, Scotland isn't a whole lot better.
The Parliament building - 10 times the original cost, and years late.
The Edinburgh tram system - a more concise way of saying "the biggest cluster**** in the realm of public transport Scotland has ever seen, and the reason council services in Edinburgh will get the shaft for almost 30 years"
and the new Forth road bridge - the most expensive bridge per unit length in the world, when a tunnel would have been far, far cheaper.
If Australia didn't have so many poisonous... well, everything, then I'd consider emigrating.
Page 1 of 2