Should the DMV be privitized?

Y/N

As for me, I'm all for a smaller government, so why not?

Fiend said:

no u

No.

Mr. Freeze said:

Y/N

As for me, I'm all for a smaller government, so why not?

I'll assume you mean the Department of Motor Vehicles.

If it were privatized, would it be a private monopoly, or would competition be allowed, with several different DMV agencies, each having their own vehicle identification number schemes and their different criteria for issuing driving licenses?

Would driver licenses still be accepted as valid identifications for people? Because you can bet that, just like you have "online universities" that send you "real" diplomas, you would have a lot of companies making their dollar by selling phony driver licenses. Need a new identity? Too young to buy beer? Illegal immigrant? Not a problem!

Now let's see how the government could be reduced further by privatizing other stuff. For example the FDA, so that it could officially belong to pharmaceutical companies. And the whole judicial system, which could then get a hostile takeover from Cosa Nostra Ltd.

SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN.

Really? Seriously?

Gez said:

I'll assume you mean the Department of Motor Vehicles.

If it were privatized, would it be a private monopoly, or would competition be allowed, with several different DMV agencies, each having their own vehicle identification number schemes and their different criteria for issuing driving licenses?

Would driver licenses still be accepted as valid identifications for people? Because you can bet that, just like you have "online universities" that send you "real" diplomas, you would have a lot of companies making their dollar by selling phony driver licenses. Need a new identity? Too young to buy beer? Illegal immigrant? Not a problem!

Now let's see how the government could be reduced further by privatizing other stuff. For example the FDA, so that it could officially belong to pharmaceutical companies. And the whole judicial system, which could then get a hostile takeover from Cosa Nostra Ltd.

SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN.

This

Private businesses can be held to a higher standard than government organizations. A good reputable compoany could manage the DMV MUCH better than the government. It would make the most sense for car companies to decide who is old enough to use their product. Since Driver's licenses are now used for more than just cars, this is where the real problem is. I don't believe in state issued ID other than proof of birth.

And yes, I dont believe in drinking age limits, drug prohibition or most age based restrictions. The only age based restrictions I support are child labor laws.

As for the notion of any kind of regulation, the private sector is equally capable. The FDA could be better run as a private company. A good example of this is the Comic Book market. The Comic Code Authority is a private company designed to rate comic books for content. Any good comic publisher makes sure they are approved by the CCA before publishing, so that readers are better informed. Comics not rated by the CCA leave the reader to decide if the content is "acceptable" or not. While there is no government mandate requring this rating, its good for business to do so. Likewise with,say, the FDA. If it were private, most food manufacturers would use them. Companies that chose not to use the FDA would suffer from bad business as a result of say ... food poisoning/unclean food. Industry regulates itself.

Patrick said:

Industry regulates itself.

No it doesn't. Go back to junior high Civics class. Clearly you learned nothing about the 1920s.

Patrick said:

Private businesses can be held to a higher standard than government organizations.

Epic lulz.

The only standard that businesses can actually be held to is one of profit. It is their only purpose and their only duty: to make profit for their shareholders. Everything else trails far, far away behind. The only way to force a private business to behave in a way which is better for society at large and on the long term, but runs contrary to its short term profits, is through the oversight of governmental organizations, and the threats of legal sanctions if they don't follow the rules. Legal sanctions operate themselves as a modifier to profit (artificially making certain attitudes less profitable because of the ensuing fines); otherwise they would simply not be taken into account at all.

Nomad said:

No it doesn't. Go back to junior high Civics class. Clearly you learned nothing about the 1920s.

And the 2000s.

The one thing I learned in History and US Government was that all Government is good. Worship your governmental masters. OBEY. I know for a fact that any government is completely corrupt and evil. That sums up my argument.

The Ontario(Canada) government recently privatized part of the MOT, our equivalent of the DMV. Now all tests have to be done at places run by this new company. However since they use the old MOT offices, this has cut the locations for both services in half. Hours at these locations have also been cut.

Sometimes privatization works and sometimes it doesn't. It really depends on how well the government can run the service. I think the real problem here is that Americans have no faith left for their government.

Industry regulates itself.

Yeah right. Why do you think these agencies exist? Before them companies would just dump toxic waste and exploit their workers. Companies exist to make money, the government exists to help the people. If your government isn't doing anything for you, you need a new government.

If you want to see what having total privatization and no regulation looks like, take a look at the industrial revolution. When people weren't allowed bathroom breaks or companies actually killed striking workers. When factories dumped all their waste into local streams that people drank out of. Fun times.

Chances are the employees will lose the pensions the government paid into for them.

Patrick said:

The one thing I learned in History and US Government was that all Government is good. Worship your governmental masters. OBEY.

The jingoism of the US education system, with its flag ceremonies and pledge, is another matter entirely.

Patrick said:

I know for a fact that any government is completely corrupt and evil. That sums up my argument.

Your argument is summed up by "government bad, corporation good". It has exactly as much merit as the reverse argument that "government good, corporation bad". Power leads to abuse of power, whether this power is granted by electoral suffrage or by accumulation of wealth.

Yes, evil greedy corporations do exist. Here's some reading for you. Non-governmental entities that start wars for profit? Check! Businesses exploiting their workers? Check! Companies deliberately selling lethally flawed products to save money? Check! Want to know where the name "banana republic" comes from? Look no further than the United Fruit Company! (That one is now called Chiquita Brand International. Their reputation became so bad that they changed their name to avoid negative publicity.) Intensive pollution? Too many to list! Businesses have a complete disregard for their workers, their environment, and their customers.

Gez said:

I'll assume you mean the Department of Motor Vehicles.

If it were privatized, would it be a private monopoly, or would competition be allowed, with several different DMV agencies, each having their own vehicle identification number schemes and their different criteria for issuing driving licenses?

Would driver licenses still be accepted as valid identifications for people? Because you can bet that, just like you have "online universities" that send you "real" diplomas, you would have a lot of companies making their dollar by selling phony driver licenses. Need a new identity? Too young to buy beer? Illegal immigrant? Not a problem!

Now let's see how the government could be reduced further by privatizing other stuff. For example the FDA, so that it could officially belong to pharmaceutical companies. And the whole judicial system, which could then get a hostile takeover from Cosa Nostra Ltd.

SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN.

Sounds good to me. Not like anything bad could come of that.

Would driver licenses still be accepted as valid identifications for people? Because you can bet that, just like you have "online universities" that send you "real" diplomas, you would have a lot of companies making their dollar by selling phony driver licenses. Need a new identity? Too young to buy beer? Illegal immigrant? Not a problem

You mean the USA doesn't have companies that advertise high quality fake driving licenses by mail order in the back of disreputable comics, "for novelty purposes"?

Next you'll be saying you can't even buy cabinets with neon-strip lights inside that JUST HAPPEN to emit the UV rays that the sun does, making these cabinets ideal for growing plants in. Though you'll really be using them to store clothes. Of course.

Patrick said:
The one thing I learned in History and US Government was that all Government is good. Worship your governmental masters. OBEY.

Do you think that a conception of public versus private institutions that has a large basis on the reaction to a series of dull and authoritarian classes for youngsters, and little on day to day experience as an adult, is really going to be of practical use in life? I had that "anarchic" reaction after high school, too. Let me know what you think in a few years!

I know for a fact that any government is completely corrupt and evil.

Some Paki across half the world likewise knows for a fact that Allah has decreed a jihad against the Jewish serpents running Wall Street and their minions, if you know what I mean.

No government or corporation is exempt from greed and corruption. The company I work for has some pretty questionable business practices. The national government has some pretty questionable practices as well. My question is: who do we trust more?

The Government? The people who can't enforce drug laws? the people who can't invade small countries, despite having greater military power? the people who watch the citizens? the people who make people disappear in their sleep?

The Corporations? The people who know how to make money? The people who hire thousands of people a year? the people who make more money than the president of the US?

Honestly, the government fails more than most corporations, and while they're equally corrupt entities, at least they can do simple tasks better than the government.

Patrick said:

It would make the most sense for car companies to decide who is old enough to use their product

Fuck you. Seriously.

Patrick said:

Honestly, the government fails more than most corporations, and while they're equally corrupt entities, at least they can do simple tasks better than the government.

So... Your criteria for a "simple task" is invading small countries (Iraq and Afghanistan both have a population of more than 30 000 000 people, so we're not talking about something Vatican City-sized either) and making money? Your estimation of a POTUS's skill is his capacity to earn money?

You truly are a moron.

Patrick said:
My question is: who do we trust more?

You can't expect good answers from someone who starts with the wrong question. The irony is that I just made a jibe by making an analogy with a religious zealot... and you came up with a question that revolves around faith. I'm not entirely surprised, but it's still funny.

The people who can't enforce drug laws? the people who can't invade small countries, despite having greater military power?

The "war on drugs" and the "war on terror" do more or less what they're expected to do. If you think they are failing, you're looking in the wrong place. The answer to laws that suck is removing the people that enforce laws? That reminds me of that fable where a dog holding a bone in its mouth looks at a pool of water, sees a dog staring up, and opens its mouth to take its bone... you know the rest.

People who abuse power are pretty happy with ideologies like the one you're ascribing to because in general a) you won't meddle with government concerns so they have less critics or competition, b) it helps them push aside public concerns or expenditures because you demand they shouldn't bother, c) it validates convenient deals they make with business entities (corruption) because you value business over government, and d) you're idealistic, where on the other hand their pragmatism is needed, so you never really have a practical point to challenge their position.

The people who know how to make money? The people who hire thousands of people a year? the people who make more money than the president of the US?

Cows produce millions of barrels of milk a day, do you listen to them too?

while they're equally corrupt entities, at least they can do simple tasks better than the government.

As if coordinating a nation with 300 million people were a "simple task." Your butter knife is very good at cutting your breakfast croissants in half, now go try and cut down a tree with it.

1. Even if corporations are more capable of meeting their objectives than governments are, that doesn't mean that the meeting of a corporation's objectives is good for the people. Governmental objectives and a corporation's objectives are not in any way equivalent.

2. Corporations are not capable of meeting their objectives, in far too many cases. The feverish pursuit of immediate wealth is detrimental to the long-term survival of a corporation, so the objective of "achieving stability" is seldom met.

3. Corporations are utterly unable to regulate themselves. This conflicts with the pursuit of immediate wealth. Several corporation-run pseudo-regulatory bodies exist, yes, but these have also abandoned their ostensible purpose for the better pursuit of immediate wealth. I'm amused that you would mention the Comics Code Authority, because the CCA is obsolete and laughable. It is now nothing but a figurehead for the companies that still submit their comics to it for approval, and there is no economic penalty for selling "unrated" comics. A much better example for you to use would have been the Motion Picture Association of America, as the ratings it hands out still significantly affect the amount of money a movie can be expected to make, giving it greater power as a regulatory body. So, I'm sure you're wondering: how do the members of the MPAA make more money by subjecting their own movies to scrutiny? It's simple. Their ratings board is notoriously uncooperative with smaller film producers, and will usually hand out restrictive ratings - which are less profitable - to these underdogs without any comments on how the film could be altered to earn a less restrictive rating. This helps keep smaller companies out of the movie-making business, which means more money for the big guys. The MPAA is merely maintaining a facade of respectability to better aid the profitability of its most powerful corporate members.

4. Try reading relevant information before you write. It's like a seat belt for the brain.

EDIT: I was going to stop there, but I could keep going all day. 5. Western culture has a long and largely successful history of fighting government's flaws and shortcomings within the avenues of influence provided by democratic government itself. If you have a problem with how the government is doing their job, then be part of the force for change. Relentlessly demand that they do their job better, and after the passage of a considerable length of time, they may. If you make no attempt to improve government, because you are discontented with it, and wish for it to be wholly replaced by some idealized entity, you leave yourself powerless.

6. Even if government was entirely replaced, by some miracle, with your ideal administration, its practical problems which you have not anticipated would soon surface, and our entire history of hard-fought governmental changes would be all be for naught. We would return to square one.

Gez said:

So... Your criteria for a "simple task" is invading small countries

Not necessarily. US mail for example fails in so many ways. More mail is lost by USPS than by any other carrier. The City where I grew up couldn't fix potholes on busy main streets, but had enough money to pay for this monstrosity.

My point is not that taking over small countries is easy, point is that government often does a poor job of what can easily be done by the private sector.

Again, this isnt to say that the private sector isnt corrupt, rather that they have a better track record. As you yourself pointed out, the Fruit companies do a better job of taking over and destroying small countries than the government can.

We don't see the government making cars, why is it their business who gets to drive them?

Frankly, my arguments mainly come from a deep seated hatred of government (especially the DMV), power and control in general. You make valid points, but coming from personal experience, I simply cannot trust an institution that fucks up on so many levels.

[/rant]

Patrick said:

Frankly, my arguments mainly come from a deep seated hatred of government (especially the DMV), power and control in general. You make valid points, but coming from personal experience, I simply cannot trust an institution that fucks up on so many levels.

[/rant]

7. If you lack the attention span and rationality to trust anything but your gut, then I'll make it easy for you: watch "The Corporation". Then you won't trust any institutions whatsoever, which is a small improvement.

8.

Patrick said:

We don't see the government making cars, why is it their business who gets to drive them?

In case this is a genuine question, I'll answer it. The government doesn't regulate who gets to drive cars. The government regulates who gets to make use of its public network of roadways, and how. If one were to follow your line of thought to its conclusions, then all roadways would have to be privately owned and privately maintained by the car companies, which would also employ a private fleet of traffic violation enforcers. Suppose the car companies failed, as they nearly did, within the last couple years, if you'll recall. Wouldn't that leave us in a bit of a pinch? Suppose also that keeping those traffic patrols and maintenance crews on the roads proved unprofitable, even in good economic times, as it certainly would. Do you really think that a corporation, all of which have profit as their sole motive, would reward your blind trust in them by providing these services, even though they drag the balance sheet down?

Patrick, stick to making cool artsy maps.

Double post: Here's a relevant personal story from back in the good ol' days of 2006 when I lurked under another name. My mom and I went to the DMV for my rite of passage into car-dom. We got there at 6:30 in the morning to beat the rush for opening at 7:00. I was second in line. First in line was actually a friend. She too was getting into the wonderful world of driving. Doors Open. We rush in. Shannon got in, got her license. It took half an hour for her to get it. I got up to the counter and THE WHOLE STATE COMPUTER SYSTEM CRASHED. I was then forced to wait no less than 3 hours for the system to come up before I could get my license. Waiting in the crowded DMV was no fun when your GBA is low on batteries and you're forced to talk to your mom for 3 hours. I got up to the counter, took the test, passed, got my license, got out. On my way out the door, the state computers crashed again.

The government is basically run by corporations thanks to lobbyists, so I don't see the point in privatizing government facilities such as the DMV.

Patrick said:

Double post: Here's a relevant personal story from back in the good ol' days of 2006 when I lurked under another name. My mom and I went to the DMV for my rite of passage into car-dom. We got there at 6:30 in the morning to beat the rush for opening at 7:00. I was second in line. First in line was actually a friend. She too was getting into the wonderful world of driving. Doors Open. We rush in. Shannon got in, got her license. It took half an hour for her to get it. I got up to the counter and THE WHOLE STATE COMPUTER SYSTEM CRASHED. I was then forced to wait no less than 3 hours for the system to come up before I could get my license. Waiting in the crowded DMV was no fun when your GBA is low on batteries and you're forced to talk to your mom for 3 hours. I got up to the counter, took the test, passed, got my license, got out. On my way out the door, the state computers crashed again.

So the moral of the story is that privatized companies' computers wouldn't crash?

Nomad said:

So the moral of the story is that privatized companies' computers wouldn't crash?

yes. If it happened once while I was there I can understand. What I fail to understand is why they use computer systems that are 10 years old (no joke, they're still running DOS at the DMV) and this happens consistenly every week

EDIT: patrick needs to stop posting while drunk :P

Patrick said:
Not necessarily. US mail for example fails in so many ways. More mail is lost by USPS than by any other carrier.

I'm surprised any public services work in the US at all, with all the bashing they receive about how costly or useless they supposedly are. If you neglect and distrust things, don't expect them to be shiny spotless.

The City where I grew up couldn't fix potholes on busy main streets, but had enough money to pay for this monstrosity.

If there are potholes, there are streets. It looks like they managed something...

My point is not that taking over small countries is easy, point is that government often does a poor job of what can easily be done by the private sector.

That isn't a point. Most of these things that get done so badly are done by coordinating the government (which receives complex social demands through its institutions) and private enterprises that do most of the work. Each entity does what it's specialized in.

As for invading with private forces, you have Blackwater and its wonderful spectacle in Iraq to look to. Imagine whole armies of mercenaries organizing wars by themselves, without consulting with anyone but each other. Legendary medieval brigandage would pale in comparison to the insanity that would produce.

rather that they have a better track record.

Less accountability results in less shit being vented. Public matters are, you know, public.

As you yourself pointed out, the Fruit companies do a better job of taking over and destroying small countries than the government can.

Visplane Overflow must have hijacked your account... To make something out of the bullshit you replied, we could say it translates to the fact that private enterprises, being private, are good at furthering (their) private interests. They might consider other interests, if they have to. To consider other interests any further, they have to be more public in nature... like a government or something. Why would they even want to bother?

We don't see the government making cars, why is it their business who gets to drive them?

There's a word called arbitration in the English dictionary. Try it out for size.

If you had little or no government and only companies, the businesses would have all the flaws companies have, plus the majority of the flaws the government has (because they need to take over its task) but without much of its accountability. Not to mention that it would make them less efficient at their primary task, as they'd waste resources on other things governments and public institutions are always busy with. Maybe you could please yourself from not even knowing that they are fucking you over... as they say, "ignorance is bliss."