The Written Word: March16, 2008
By Rafe Mair
Last time I talked about selling BC Hydro by bankrupting it and I suspect many of you wonder why it will happen if I’m right.
My colleague on CBC’s early Edition Monday political panel – and good friend - Erin Airton will tell you as she told our audience. Those who oppose the “running rivers policy” where private power is developed on public rivers is what free enterprise is all about. Why, she asked recently, are we so opposed to business people generating power instead of an overgrown, bloated public utility? At least that was the gist of what she said.
And if you’re a Milton Friedman pure capitalist who believes that the money generated by instant multi-millionaires all “trickles down” to the needy it does make sense even though you must accept that these “running rivers” will now have roads into them, transmission lines out of them, and a river flow controlled for purposes of creating power not sustaining fish populations. You must also think it’s a good idea to let these water rights go for peppercorn rent ceding temporary use of the surrounding land which can later be converted into titles.
There is a maxim of “free enterprise” involved here, you see – those who take great risks to make money should have those risks eliminated when public property is involved, the word “free” meaning “risk free”.
We all should rejoice, we’re told, that what was once a moneymaking public enterprise that gave huge dividends to the public purse so we could build schools and hospitals is no more and in its place are 500 plus very, very rich friends of the government. Thus the onetime hero of free enterprise, W.A.C. Bennett has become the anti-Christ.
This is, after all, the 21st Century and we must bid adieu to stupid notions about wild places, streams full of fish and virgin valleys and welcome in BC’s own version of the post communist oil billionaires in Russia – that is, after all, what capitalism is all about.
Isn’t it????.
Previous Story - Next Story
Return to Home
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6046520409389956642&hl=en
The gist of the idea is that the banks are now all getting multi billion dollar bail outs by the federal reserve, and yet the federal reserve is supposed to be the pinnacle of the capitalist market. So why is fed policy to bail out banks with welfare dollars, when everyone else is supposed to go bankrupt, accept the banks? Is that a free market or is it a market that just makes its future problems bigger through the currency deflation (savings) tax (think oil$$) via the expansion of the monetary supply.
The people making the argument Rafe talks about do not believe in market economies as anything more then a useful negotiating tool. Its all a game for them to see how far they can push to get more for themselves out of greed motivation, where they try to change to rules to subsidize their wealth with public dollars, assets, and or regulation.
A free enterprise economy is one of equal opportunities through things like education, essential infrastructure, as well as access to energy, and most importantly regulatory considerations.
A free enterprise concept is not one of river hydro monopoly for private profit. Capitalism maybe... but it is not free enterprise, and anyone making that argument is twisting words to legitimize their argument, meaning they themselves know their argument is flawed... otherwise they would not resort to use of phony meanings to words that muddy the objectivity of their argument. IMHO