Well, I don't completely know the answer to your question yet. I am working that out continuously, including here in this conversation. I have identified a couple recurring qualities. One is the prospect of the opposite, as I explained above. If I imagine a society with xyz that is ONLY provided by business and I think that's a very bad idea, then I calculate that government should be involved in xyz at some level. I have also identified that government is BIG (or can be big) and some things need BIG. Again this is more a situation of what needs to be done that I can't do and that I don't think is a good idea to have done by business only.
Hm. Maybe that's why I (semi-consciously) rejected your suggestion of public supermarkets. A grocery store, getting food to people is not something that requires BIG to happen. Of course, neither does schooling. More thinking out loud... I think that an uneducated child can be overlooked far more easily than a starving child. I think that our society would find starvation a hard limit. Even society zoomed in to the maximum level, a single individual. I, myself, have given food to others who were in need.
Your question, I don't want to stray far from it.
Quote:
|
What traits does each need have that make them good or bad candidates for public operation?
|
I am working, thinking about this. Cliche though it may be, I think each one should be considered on its own merits, and that there isn't a mechanical formula to arrive at a definitive answer. I know this is not simple, or maybe not even clear. I'm working on it, we're working on it.