Why It's Impossible to Indict a Cop

[JahFocus CS]

If a city had multiple private police forces they would all be competing against each other. If one private police force ruins its reputation by shooting unarmed kids and raping black women then they won't get any contracts.

A real open market for private policing will never happen though. It will probably be some fake privatization bullshyt that we see with banking, military, prison, telecommunication, etc. where you have a handful of conglomerates with close ties to the government. And if someone wanted to start their own private police company they would have to jump through hoops and hurdles of over regulation and pay an excessive amount taxes (while the big companies pay near nothing). Then all of the hipster idiots can say, "See? Capitalism doesn't work!"

More "anarcho-capitalism" () or minarchist stuff, I see...

If we imagine a state of affairs in which there was a "real open market for private policing," what would prevent the private police force with the contract from forging close ties to the government to arrive at the "fake privatization bullshyt" you described?

Or, if we can imagine a state of affairs without government, what would prevent firms from allying with each other to create a state to prevent the masses of people (workers) from socializing production?

Capitalism requires the state... If you're arguing that the state picks winners - well, yes it does, but you're just arguing for a leveling of the playing field between the larger capitalists and the smaller capitalists.

 

[mc_brew]

Fair enough.
I think it's best if I just fall back and wait, the police will continue to build a strong case for me.

they might, because you certainly haven't.... body cameras would provide the incremental improvement you're offering without half the upheaval... you need to provide evidence of more than just a little better.... in fact out of all your comments on this thread, about all you have said is it won't be worse...

your arguments are just sophomoric... basically what you are saying is: government = bad, therefore private sector = good.... if only life was that simplistic...

 

[DEAD7]

More "anarcho-capitalism" () or minarchist stuff, I see...

If we imagine a state of affairs in which there was a "real open market for private policing," what would prevent the private police force with the contract from forging close ties to the government to arrive at the "fake privatization bullshyt" you described?

Or, if we can imagine a state of affairs without government, what would prevent firms from allying with each other to create a state to prevent the masses of people (workers) from socializing production?

Capitalism requires the state... If you're arguing that the state picks winners - well, yes it does, but you're just arguing for a leveling of the playing field between the larger capitalists and the smaller capitalists.

Thread derailment, on JahFocus.

 

[JahFocus CS]

Thread derailment, on JahFocus.

You gotta give more than that, breh. Address the points. And you can't say I took the thread off topic, we've been discussing privatized policing since you brought it up

 

[DEAD7]

they might, because you certainly haven't.... body cameras would provide the incremental improvement you're offering without half the upheaval... you need to provide evidence of more than just a little better.... in fact out of all your comments on this thread, about all you have said is it won't be worse...

your arguments are just sophomoric... basically what you are saying is: government = bad, therefore private sector = good.... if only life was that simplistic...

The reduction in cost is reason enough to consider it... add the increased accountability, and transparency, and I don't see what you're going on about.


...and to be accurate its, Govt.= a beyond sh*tty costly job, private= more accountable and cost effective.

 

[DEAD7]

If we imagine a state of affairs in which there was a "real open market for private policing," what would prevent the private police force with the contract from forging close ties to the government to arrive at the "fake privatization bullshyt" you described?

Regulations

 

[Jutt]

The reduction in cost is reason enough to consider it... add the increased accountability, and transparency, and I don't see what you're going on about.


...and to be accurate its, Govt.= a beyond sh*tty costly job, private= more accountable and cost effective.

The private sector has just as many fukkups as the govt. Are we forgetting the private prison industry? Blackwater? or maybe a more general example, banks.

 

[PikaDaDon]

If a city had multiple private police forces they would all be competing against each other. If one private police force ruins its reputation by shooting unarmed kids and raping black women then they won't get any contracts.

A real open market for private policing will never happen though. It will probably be some fake privatization bullshyt that we see with banking, military, prison, telecommunication, etc. where you have a handful of conglomerates with close ties to the government. And if someone wanted to start their own private police company they would have to jump through hoops and hurdles of over regulation and pay an excessive amount of taxes (while the big companies pay near nothing). Then all of the hipster idiots can say, "See? Capitalism doesn't work!"

The private sector has just as many fukkups as the govt. Are we forgetting the private prison industry? Blackwater? or maybe a more general example, banks.

 

[JahFocus CS]

Regulations

So... the state?

These arguments essentially advance the interests of small(er) business owners... not the working-class. But what would prevent larger businesses from simply recreating the state of affairs you decry as "corporatism?" Large businesses will always seek to protect and advance their interests from upstarts. And they have more resources... in an economy where cash is king, politicians will still be able to be bought and influenced by the highest bidder. Even if you achieved an economy along the lines of your "free market," it would be only a matter of time before the current state of affairs was recreated as those regulations were rolled back and defeated by larger business interests.

 

[DEAD7]

So... the state?

These arguments essentially advance the interests of small(er) business owners... not the working-class. But what would prevent larger businesses from simply recreating the state of affairs you decry as "corporatism?" Large businesses will always seek to protect and advance their interests from upstarts. And they have more resources... in an economy where cash is king, politicians will still be able to be bought and influenced by the highest bidder. Even if you achieved an economy along the lines of your "free market," it would be only a matter of time before the current state of affairs was recreated as those regulations were rolled back and defeated by larger business interests.

Make it illegal.

 

[DEAD7]

Capitalism is forever on trial.

 

[JahFocus CS]

Make it illegal.

Laws can be changed...

 

[DEAD7]

Laws can be changed...

So regulations don't and/or wont work?

 

[Rekkapryde]

you then we could have black owned police companies for predominantly black areas

-DMP-

the corruption....

 

[Jutt]

I guess you really haven't comprehended anything that I was posting on the subject and were too quick to let someone be a mark for your simple rhetoric. I never once say capitalism won't work. I'm pointing out that you can't sit there and say the private sector would be a better option when it's been shown that these companies are subject to the same corruption that we've seen from the government. If you put everything in a vacuum(which it seems like you're doing) then yeah it works, but it's just not practical for a complete overhaul.