What next??

In reply to Samwells
.
Good question. Here is another:

Is Norman Manley Airport losing money?

And another:

If it is not losing money why get rid of it to give to private enterprise what the Jamaican taxpayer has been making money on?




This is just blind adherence to the dictates of neo-con driven hold-dung and tek-way philosophies.

In reply to Ewart His administration is ridiculous

In reply to Ewart

Because the taxpayer doesn't wholly own it in the first place.

In reply to Freddie

So...............

the taxpayer owns a part of it?

In reply to Ewart

If yuh can't pay your mortgage, who ends up owning the house?

In reply to Ewart

Everything should be divested. Look at Sangsters airport.....when last yuh fly in there. It is like night and day since the Canadians tek ova.

Govt should focus on security, education, infrastructure & job creation. That's perhaps already one thing more than they are capable of.

Divest everthing and let real business people tek ova. I know of no business in JA that the govt has ever operated successfully.

In reply to EwartGovernment cannot run every thing. This is the only thing they are doing right.But some should have been sold to the Jamaican people let them become a sharing society.We had that here in 70s over here when the Labour Government nationalised every thing , that was losing money and it did work out.Iam not a Margret Thatcher fan but when she came to power she allowed the ordinary British public to buy shares in these industries, from British Airways, Water, British Gas, BP.I still have share in Bitish Gas and British Airways.

In reply to londoner
.
Bru, I have no problem with selling shares to the public.


I do have a problem with selling profitable government-owned (read taxpayer-owned) enterprises to private corporations just to satisfy the theology that private companies do better.

Sell Air Jamaica if you must; it is losing money.

But why sell organisations or enterprises that are actually putting money into the public purse?

And when we have sold all of them what will we sell then??

Wow, free market rhetoric spontaneously breaking out on cc.com. Next there'll be entire threads dedicated to von Mises or the Pareto principle. Friedmanites and Keynesians will scar the land in bloodied battle...

In reply to HumbleCalf
/

Was through Sangsters several times last year. The place looks great, is well run - except of course for that security leak with the Canjet plane!

I do not have a problem with the Sangster arrangement. I am sure the government (and the taxpayer) will get something out of the lease, peppercorn though it might be.


But I do not accept one iota that we should sell profitable enterprises because "the government cannot own everything."

That cannot be a rational reason for disposing of profitable government-owned enterprises.

In reply to Ewart

Yuh selling them to pay off your debt. In future, stop borrowing so much.

In reply to Ewart

When Govt owns, it has to pay wages and expenses, etc to make a profit, so u might be spending 1 dollar to make 25 cents.

When it is private owned the govt does not have the expenses, but collects corporation tax, so u spend nothing and get taxes.

the key is to determiner which approach brings in more money after netting out!

In reply to Ewart

Let us frame what we are discussing here..... I am saying the govt should not own businesses because private owners will do a much better job.

You could always carve out certain situations which would be reasonable exceptions, e.g., I think absent private investment the govt could invest in solar energy with the ultimate goal of divesting it as soon it has passed the incubation stage.

Let's focus on JA as it is now though. We have no money and limited high level management. The gov't would be much better off selling all businesses and focus on the business of government.

Air JA: SELL
Sugar factories and land: SELL/Lease
Properties abroad & at home: SELL
Bauxite interests: SELL
Banking interests: SELL
Sports facilities: SELL

In the end the thinking is that if the gov't sell these things then the benefits of tax collected, better run businesses and better focus of members of government would outweigh the loss profits from these businesses.

And Ewart, I have not touched on the propensity for politicians to get corrupted when they have their hands in business that they *think* they own.

In reply to HumbleCalf

I hear you loud and clear, Humble. And you make some good points.

I would simply note in passing that the rush to privatisation and deregulation has not been all it was cracked up to be. We need look no further than the fact that, led by the US, governments in several countries have had to take taxpayer's money to bail out failing private companies.

That, my friend, is a very big elephant in the room of privatisation.


But back to Jamaica. Some years ago we were into a discussion about what sections of the economy the government should have a hand in or should own entirely.

You have listed some that you believe the government should sell, regardless of whether it is making a profit or not. Which ones would you say are suitable for government ownership?

.

In reply to Ewart

In general I do not think govt should own any business, but, there are instances when it is OK for the govt to act as a nursery, so, let's take solar energy, that's one area I think the govt could try to kick start.

Years ago Seaga tried to kick start some agri business with Spring Plains and that was a colossal failure but I still think the concept makes sense.

The JA govt tried something with beef cattle (Midland Enterprises later named Lydford Farms) and that did well for a while but ended up a failure.

So, in general, the govt should only get involved in businesses where the potential benefits are significant and even then their ultimate goal should be to divest as soon as they can find a buyer.

thought they were moving the airport to Vernamfield?

In reply to camos

an international airport at vernamfield? i dont think so.

In reply to Samwells

When Omar and the PNP was selling out everything and running them own Ponzi scheme with ridiculously high interest rates.

In reply to bimbo stewwpppsss

In reply to HumbleCalf

Damn you sounding like me.

Good for them. They do not need to be in all these businesses. I am sure they will be better run once privatised. And the Gov't will generate good cash flows to reduce some of its debts.

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Yuh don't really get economics do you? If you're spending a dollar to make 25 cents, you're making what's called a loss, not a profit.

A more useful concept is that of opportunity cost. Even if yuh getting a positive return on yuh investment, what else could you be doing with the money instead?

In reply to HumbleCalf

a lot of these assets were acquired by the gov. because there was an absence of private capital, in the absence of a vibrant capital market gov. will have to continue initiate certain economic activity.what we need in ja are some real business men and not just 'Buy and Sell' people.

In reply to Samwells

Can we apply the same term to the previous 3-term administration that he replaced?

In reply to camos

a point lost to many of his critics. Obama's used similar tactics...i.e. assisting private industry using government resources.

In reply to dcbreds

wasn't Air Jamaica in private hands once too? Was it well run then?

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy are we divesting too in Bim. the PM should consider selling the BLP to an Englishman

In reply to sudden

POwen is willing to buy it!

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy Powen has the mouth but not the money

In reply to sudden

thought you were all english men?

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

I dont know. You tell me.

In reply to camos

y? because we speak English?

In reply to dcbreds

I dont know either, but u made a bold statement!

if it were well run and profitable as a private enterprise, it would not now be having to be sold off to CA!

when people going to understand that these things are taking money that could be better spent on helping the Jamaican people. these assets have to be divested.

with a third airport under construction in Bascobel, i can see one of the reason why this divestment is also important.

Link Text

Link Text







we also have new Cargo port to be constructed at Vernamfield Clarendon


Link Text


Link Text



how would the government handle all these things at ones?