Simple but basic question -- and proposal -- about ports and policy

[Armstead]

What would be wrong with pushing a policy in which entities would be formed to operate individual port facilities as public ventures, instead of turning them all o0ver to outside mega operators.

These could either be publicly held municipal corporations, or private entities operating under charter with strict controls for acountability (like the old blue-chip utility stockes were).

This would be a return to the idea that the public infrastructure should be public. A step away from the mania of privitization of everything.

In economic terms, it wpould also be an example of rebuilding the domestic economy, by restoring the idea of a multiplicity of interests, rather than the consolidation of everything into the hands of elite global oligarchs.

In terms of security, this would also be done in conjunction with a coordinated national policy of greater controls and examination of cargoes.

Not a perfect solution, but at least it would be a step towards reasserting the idea that eonomies should be based in the communities that are effected by economic activity, instead of nebulous Overlords of Global Capital.

[Armstead]

1. Kick

Maybe this isn't a sexy question, but it does reflect one of the deeper issues raised by the ports thing.

Anyone have any thoughts? Or opinions as to why this may not be practical or desirable as a goal?

[kenny blankenship]

2. oh well you know government can't do anything right

or so the Overlords of Global Capital keep telling me.

[Armstead]

3. Yes I know that's been the CONservative line for years

And there are probably elements of truth in it. But we have to counter that, because the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater.

But it's just as true for the Empire of Corporations. The real issue is the size of any institution that gets too big and powerful and removed from the roots. Corporate oligopolies are just as inefficient and bureaucrtatic and abusive as a government that gets too biog.