Now...the private sector is taking over prisons; they are also trying to take over public schools, and make them "private."
The private-sector is not taking over the prison systems, they are being contracted out. Private sector is not the same as state-contracted.
You can call private ownership of what used to be public schools anything you choose but it is still a rose. Or, you can call privately owned and run prisons "contracted out" it still boils down to the private sector running jails and schools for profit.
"Death and life [are] in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof."Proverbs 18:21
TENAC ... I think what is more relevant regarding Fodoson's post is the dichotomy of perspective with regards to "regulation". The Left constantly, and wrongly, assumes that "deregulation" is the problem. When they speak of regulation, they speak as if giving the private sector MORE FREEDOM, is the reason that the car has run off the cliff.
Deregulation of the banks and the securities industry is most certainly is the reason why the car ran off the cliff, this time.
In contrast, those of us who are pro Free Markets point to the fact that Government Regulaiton has made it such that the US is no longer an attractive place to do business, and thus Private Sector Companies are, in some cases, FORCED to offshore jobs.
Can you give an example of a government regulation that forced a private sector concern to move jobs off shore?
Truth be known, and I'm betting you'll agree with me, is that the combination of Government Business Regulation [the mountains of fees and requirements and additional cost], in conjunction with a free trade agreements [ie., deregulaiton with regards to requirements to operate at home], is the perfect recipe for offshoring jobs.
IMO, it's quite simple, IF you are going to put in all kinds of irrational government regulation on business at home, then you MUST also have in place "Protectionist" policies that prevent companies from offshoring. Of course, that just causes the Large Companies to just up and leave all together, such that they can escape the regulation all together.
It would make more sense to me, make the US a more business friendly environment, such that you can implement your large, skilled labor force. IF the government, ie, the "people" are going to force such n such requirement in the interest of protecting the public good, then IMO, it is incumbent on the Government, ie., the People, to help foot the cost of such.
Perfect Example. Coal Fired Power Plants. Coal is the cheapest form of Electricity on the Planet. But .. coal also is the dirtiest energy on the planet. We the People WANT AND NEED cheap energy, but We the People also WANT AND NEED to protect our environment. IMO, as opposed to requiring the Coal Fired Plant to foot the bill on installing the necessary technology to ensure a clean environment, We the People should be helping to foot that bill. Everyone wins in that scenario. A) All of the Jobs associated with Coal Fired Energy are preserved. ... B) you create a demand for more jobs in the Environmental Tech Sector ... C) The Coal Plant is not forced out of business, and thus stays in operation, .. while D), We the People enjoy cheap electricity while also protecting the environment.
What would be the mechanism for we the people to do this?