Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mikkergp 1430 days ago
Why are politicians so eager to do this? Is it because politicians get bribes, or because they represent the investors some how?
4 comments

If it is anything like the UK, it's a simple cycle of:

- Under-fund the public service because it "costs too much" (ignore the value it generates for the public).

- Service performs poorly when underfunded, so you can manufacture consent to sell it, argue that private ownership will be more efficient.

- Sell it, creating short-term income you can use to spend on stuff people (and your mates) like (often tax cuts), making your government seem effective. You can also sell it to your mates who then get easy profit milking a natural monopoly for profit, probably kicking some back to you in the form of a cushy "advisor" gig when you retire.

- Inevitably end up making the unprofitable parts of it public again when the private providers simply stop doing it, or go under trying to. You then have these expensive bits of public service with no income-generating bits to offset them you can point to and say public services are inefficient. Private profits, public losses.

- Hey look, public services cost too much! We should under-fund some other ones...

Because they get a truckload of money to spend.

There is also the reasonable argument that government run entities are wasteful.

So, it's not a simple thing.

I've thought a good policy would be govt asset sale profit gets held in trust for ~12 years.

This way it cant be a balance the budget act, and the cash might benifit your opponent 3 election cycles down the track.

It probably wont stop overselling of assets but would definitely take away a short term incentive.

It's probably a good idea. Or, if they can't run deficits (many US states have this) and asset sales don't count as revenue you'd probably be in a similar situation.
They get short term funds for their agenda.
Yes.