The role of the state in public companies

realitykeeper

It is well known that the state is incompetent and should therefore have no hand, act or part in anything. The privatization of everything is therefore a no-brainer.

However, I do think that the state could certainly use its financial muscle to set up major capital generating projects provided these are then sold immediately when they are established and bringing in revenue.

This strategy would address certain problems the country may face. For example, the state could hire an exploration vessel and crew to find oil. When it is found, the state could purchase and install a rig and supporting infrastructure. Then, this could be sold at a profit and terms which are beneficial to Ireland before the unions have time to infect the workforce.

A similar strategy could be used to establish an industry in wind or wave energy. Large industrial farms are another possibility either by direct intervention or by using legislation to create the incentives and means necessary for the flourishment of such entities.

Unfortunately, the Irish government wastes any revenue it gets through the issuance of bonds - on social programs, government salaries and the like. Needless to say, I consider existing Irish government bonds to be an atrocious investment. It is a wonder to me why investors in those bonds are not demanding sky high interest. I suppose they will when they realize the true risks. Am I not correct?

Peregrinus

How are things on Planet Neocon these days?

We're doing fine on Planet Earth, thanks.

fr336

The incredibly amazing private sector need the state to bail them out when they mess up / get too greedy and can then also blame that same state for causing it all in the first place and pointing to cuts on the state everywhere cos well you know, someone has to pay. Priceless.

Peregrinus

realitykeeper wrote: »

I consider existing Irish government bonds to be an atrocious investment. It is a wonder to me why investors in those bonds are not demanding sky high interest. I suppose they will when they realize the true risks.

I think you should consider the possibility that they already appreciate the true risks, and it is you who do not.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Am I not correct?

I see no evidnce that you are, to be honest. And I can't help noting that you don't present any evidence, or display any dawning recognition of the possibility that some evidence might be required to support the thesis that you have much better capacity to judge risk than the markets at large. And of course none of this inspires me with great confidence in your judgment.

K-9

Thread starts with a controversial, sweeping statement that is inflammatory and then attracts inflammatory responses...........