31 de Agosto de 2005
« La gestión privada del agua salva vidas | Principal | 4. No olvidaremos las víctimas »
Bitácora de José Carlos Rodríguez
Sandy Springs, ciudad libertaria
El área de Sandy Springs lleva treinta años intentando la independencia administrativa de la ciudad de Atlanta. Sus esfuerzos no han sido en vano, ya que los responsables han conseguido que esta población de 87.000 habitantes inicie un camino por su cuenta, a partir del próximo uno de enero. Ese día comenzará una auténtica aventura ciudadana. Sandy Springs se convertirá en una ciudad libre. En una ciudad voluntaria, en la que la mayoría de los servicios estarán provistos por empresas privadas. La historia es que
Nota: Gracias a Manel y al resto.
Cuando los líderes se preguntaron qué tipo de gobierno les iba mejor, surgió una visión clara: tan poco gobierno como sea posible. De modo que cuando la ciudad de Sandy Springs abra por negocios el 1 de enero, las empresas privadas serán llamadas para gestionar programas de aguas estancadas, el mantenimiento de las calles, inspecciones de edificios, recursos humanos, contabilidad... en otras palabras, casi todo a excepción de la policía, los bomberos y los servicios de emergencia. La ciudad, dijo un líder de la comunidad, solo añadirá personal cuando sea evidente que es necesario. Los líderes de Sandy Springs también se han puesto en contacto con el Reason Public Policy Institute, un think tank de Californa que promueve la privatización. Geoffrey F. Segal, que visitó recientemente Sandy Springs, declaró que la abierta disposición de la ciudad para experimentar 'es ciertamente única'. 'Te puedes imaginar este tipo de discusiones cuando este país se estaba creando', declaró Segal, el director del Instituto para las políticas de privatización y reformas gubernativas. 'Si de aquí a un año, el 70 ó el 80 por ciento de las funciones (en Sandy Springs) están siendo llevadas a cabo por empresas privadas, puede que muestre a otras ciudades que se puede hacer, y que no necesitan florituras'Esta gran idea de Sandy Springs no es nueva, ni surge de la nada. De hecho sus administradores estaban impresionados por el caso de Weston, en Florida,
una comunidad de 65.000 habitantes en el Condado de Broward con un presupuesto anual de 100 millones de dólares y tres funcionarios. Weston no fue concebido como un experimento de gobierno mínimo, pero tras escindirse en 1996, los gestores reconocieron el atractivo de la subcontratación de servicios, según dijo el alcalde de la localidad, John R. Flint. 'Todo ocurrió sin más', dijo Flint. 'No vamos a tener ningún empleado. No vamos a construir una casa consistorial y nadie va a erigir un imperio...'Este experimento está causando gran expectación en las áreas vecinas. No son los únicos casos. Yo expliqué en esta bitácora el de Crestwood, una pequeña localidad de 12.000 habitantes, que eligió a Chester Stranczek como alcalde en 1969, y desde entonces no ha perdido una sola elección. Su política ha sido la de subcontratar todos los servicios que ha podido. Y eso que Crestwood cuenta con 17 funcionarios, todo un ejército al lado de Weston. Creo que merece la pena recordar las palabras del alcalde Stranczek:
'Cuando me convertí en alcalde, cercenamos el enorme departamento de Obras Públicas que gestionaba las fugas de agua, etc. Simplemente contratamos para esos problemas a empresas privadas. Así que en vez de tener un montón de trabajadores holgazaneando cuando llueve, pagar salarios, seguros, beneficios médicos, más la maquinaria (...), contratamos empresas que hagan el trabajo. Los ahorros son fantásticos. Lo mismo pasa con la contabilidad. Simplemente pagamos a un auditor 8.000 dólares al año para que haga el trabajo. Ahorros: sobre los 35.000 dólares anuales. Gracias a un gobierno eficiente hay dinero de sobra para pagar los servicios necesarios.'Y es que, como dice el propio Stranczek,
'Las empresas no son exitosas trabajando con pérdidas.'¿Quién podría quitarle la razón? Vía Out of Control.
Nota: Gracias a Manel y al resto.
Comentarios
"Bells and whistles": elementos o características que son útiles o decorativos pero no esenciales (Merriam-Webster Online). La expresión evoca, supongo, la campana y el silbato de una locomotora de vapor.
me alegra oir esta magnifica iniciativa, mientras en Europa (como siempre)vamos a paso cambiado. Mientras tanto en España, ni queremos oir hablar de la privatizacion de las pensiones. Un caos...
De lo mismo hablo yo en mi blog, te invito a echarle un vistazo al free state project de New Hampshire.
un abrazo liberal...
http://www.vlencialiberal.blogspot.com/
De lo mismo hablo yo en mi blog, te invito a echarle un vistazo al free state project de New Hampshire.
un abrazo liberal...
http://www.vlencialiberal.blogspot.com/
Biloxy ciudad libre, de tan libre que era se ha quedado sola cuando ha hecho falta algo más que casinos.
Por favor no confundamos los adjetivos libre != liberal != libertaria != libertadora.
Para escribir bien hace falta tener un diccionario a mano.
Por favor no confundamos los adjetivos libre != liberal != libertaria != libertadora.
Para escribir bien hace falta tener un diccionario a mano.
How the Free Market Killed New Orleans
By Michael Parenti
09/04/05 "ICH" -- -- The free market played a crucial role in the destruction of New Orleans and the death of thousands of its residents. Armed with advanced warning that a momentous (force 5) hurricane was going to hit that city and surrounding areas, what did officials do? They played the free market.
They announced that everyone should evacuate. Everyone was expected to devise their own way out of the disaster area by private means, just as the free market dictates, just like people do when disaster hits free-market Third World countries.
It is a beautiful thing this free market in which every individual pursues his or her own personal interests and thereby effects an optimal outcome for the entire society. This is the way the invisible hand works its wonders.
There would be none of the collectivistic regimented evacuation as occurred in Cuba. When an especially powerful hurricane hit that island last year, the Castro government, abetted by neighborhood citizen committees and local Communist party cadres, evacuated 1.3 million people, more than 10 percent of the country's population, with not a single life lost, a heartening feat that went largely unmentioned in the U.S. press.
On Day One of the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina, it was already clear that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of American lives had been lost in New Orleans. Many people had "refused" to evacuate, media reporters explained, because they were just plain "stubborn."
It was not until Day Three that the relatively affluent telecasters began to realize that tens of thousands of people had failed to flee because they had nowhere to go and no means of getting there. With hardly any cash at hand or no motor vehicle to call their own, they had to sit tight and hope for the best. In the end, the free market did not work so well for them.
By Michael Parenti
09/04/05 "ICH" -- -- The free market played a crucial role in the destruction of New Orleans and the death of thousands of its residents. Armed with advanced warning that a momentous (force 5) hurricane was going to hit that city and surrounding areas, what did officials do? They played the free market.
They announced that everyone should evacuate. Everyone was expected to devise their own way out of the disaster area by private means, just as the free market dictates, just like people do when disaster hits free-market Third World countries.
It is a beautiful thing this free market in which every individual pursues his or her own personal interests and thereby effects an optimal outcome for the entire society. This is the way the invisible hand works its wonders.
There would be none of the collectivistic regimented evacuation as occurred in Cuba. When an especially powerful hurricane hit that island last year, the Castro government, abetted by neighborhood citizen committees and local Communist party cadres, evacuated 1.3 million people, more than 10 percent of the country's population, with not a single life lost, a heartening feat that went largely unmentioned in the U.S. press.
On Day One of the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina, it was already clear that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of American lives had been lost in New Orleans. Many people had "refused" to evacuate, media reporters explained, because they were just plain "stubborn."
It was not until Day Three that the relatively affluent telecasters began to realize that tens of thousands of people had failed to flee because they had nowhere to go and no means of getting there. With hardly any cash at hand or no motor vehicle to call their own, they had to sit tight and hope for the best. In the end, the free market did not work so well for them.
It was not until Day Three that the relatively affluent telecasters began to realize that tens of thousands of people had failed to flee because they had nowhere to go and no means of getting there. With hardly any cash at hand or no motor vehicle to call their own, they had to sit tight and hope for the best. In the end, the free market did not work so well for them.
Many of these people were low-income African Americans, along with fewer numbers of poor whites. It should be remembered that most of them had jobs before Katrina's lethal visit. That's what most poor people do in this country: they work, usually quite hard at dismally paying jobs, sometimes more than one job at a time. They are poor not because they're lazy but because they have a hard time surviving on poverty wages while burdened by high prices, high rents, and regressive taxes.
The free market played a role in other ways. Bush's agenda is to cut government services to the bone and make people rely on the private sector for the things they might need. So he sliced $71.2 million from the budget of the New Orleans Corps of Engineers, a 44 percent reduction. Plans to fortify New Orleans levees and upgrade the system of pumping out water had to be shelved.
Bush took to the airways and said that no one could have foreseen this disaster. Just another lie tumbling from his lips. All sorts of people had been predicting disaster for New Orleans, pointing to the need to strengthen the levees and the pumps, and fortify the coastlands.
In their campaign to starve out the public sector, the Bushite reactionaries also allowed developers to drain vast areas of wetlands. Again, that old invisible hand of the free market would take care of things. The developers, pursuing their own private profit, would devise outcomes that would benefit us all.
Many of these people were low-income African Americans, along with fewer numbers of poor whites. It should be remembered that most of them had jobs before Katrina's lethal visit. That's what most poor people do in this country: they work, usually quite hard at dismally paying jobs, sometimes more than one job at a time. They are poor not because they're lazy but because they have a hard time surviving on poverty wages while burdened by high prices, high rents, and regressive taxes.
The free market played a role in other ways. Bush's agenda is to cut government services to the bone and make people rely on the private sector for the things they might need. So he sliced $71.2 million from the budget of the New Orleans Corps of Engineers, a 44 percent reduction. Plans to fortify New Orleans levees and upgrade the system of pumping out water had to be shelved.
Bush took to the airways and said that no one could have foreseen this disaster. Just another lie tumbling from his lips. All sorts of people had been predicting disaster for New Orleans, pointing to the need to strengthen the levees and the pumps, and fortify the coastlands.
In their campaign to starve out the public sector, the Bushite reactionaries also allowed developers to drain vast areas of wetlands. Again, that old invisible hand of the free market would take care of things. The developers, pursuing their own private profit, would devise outcomes that would benefit us all.
But wetlands served as a natural absorbent and barrier between New Orleans and the storms riding in from across the sea. And for some years now, the wetlands have been disappearing at a frightening pace on the Gulf? coast. All this was of no concern to the reactionaries in the White House.
As for the rescue operation, the free-marketeers like to say that relief to the more unfortunate among us should be left to private charity. It was a favorite preachment of President Ronald Reagan that "private charity can do the job." And for the first few days that indeed seemed to be the policy with the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina.
The federal government was nowhere in sight but the Red Cross went into action. Its message: "Don't send food or blankets; send money." Meanwhile Pat Robertson and the Christian Broadcasting Network---taking a moment off from God's work of pushing John Roberts nomination to the Supreme Court---called for donations and announced "Operation Blessing" which consisted of a highly-publicized but totally inadequate shipment of canned goods and bibles.
By Day Three even the myopic media began to realize the immense failure of the rescue operation. People were dying because relief had not arrived. The authorities seemed more concerned with the looting than with rescuing people. It was property before people, just like the free marketeers always want.
But questions arose that the free market did not seem capable of answering: Who was in charge of the rescue operation? Why so few helicopters and just a scattering of Coast Guard rescuers? Why did it take helicopters five hours to get six people out of one hospital? When would the rescue operation gather some steam? Where were the feds? The state troopers? The National Guard? Where were the buses and trucks? the shelters and portable toilets? The medical supplies and water?
As for the rescue operation, the free-marketeers like to say that relief to the more unfortunate among us should be left to private charity. It was a favorite preachment of President Ronald Reagan that "private charity can do the job." And for the first few days that indeed seemed to be the policy with the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina.
The federal government was nowhere in sight but the Red Cross went into action. Its message: "Don't send food or blankets; send money." Meanwhile Pat Robertson and the Christian Broadcasting Network---taking a moment off from God's work of pushing John Roberts nomination to the Supreme Court---called for donations and announced "Operation Blessing" which consisted of a highly-publicized but totally inadequate shipment of canned goods and bibles.
By Day Three even the myopic media began to realize the immense failure of the rescue operation. People were dying because relief had not arrived. The authorities seemed more concerned with the looting than with rescuing people. It was property before people, just like the free marketeers always want.
But questions arose that the free market did not seem capable of answering: Who was in charge of the rescue operation? Why so few helicopters and just a scattering of Coast Guard rescuers? Why did it take helicopters five hours to get six people out of one hospital? When would the rescue operation gather some steam? Where were the feds? The state troopers? The National Guard? Where were the buses and trucks? the shelters and portable toilets? The medical supplies and water?
Where was Homeland Security? What has Homeland Security done with the $33.8 billions allocated to it in fiscal 2005? Even ABC-TV evening news (September 1, 2005) quoted local officials as saying that "the federal government's response has been a national disgrace."
In a moment of delicious (and perhaps mischievous) irony, offers of foreign aid were tendered by France, Germany and several other nations. Russia offered to send two plane loads of food and other materials for the victims. Predictably, all these proposals were quickly refused by the White House. America the Beautiful and Powerful, America the Supreme Rescuer and World Leader, America the Purveyor of Global Prosperity could not accept foreign aid from others. That would be a most deflating and insulting role reversal. Were the French looking for another punch in the nose?
Besides, to have accepted foreign aid would have been to admit the truth---that the Bushite reactionaries had neither the desire nor the decency to provide for ordinary citizens, not even those in the most extreme straits. Next thing you know, people would start thinking that George W. Bush was really nothing more than a fulltime agent of Corporate America.
In a moment of delicious (and perhaps mischievous) irony, offers of foreign aid were tendered by France, Germany and several other nations. Russia offered to send two plane loads of food and other materials for the victims. Predictably, all these proposals were quickly refused by the White House. America the Beautiful and Powerful, America the Supreme Rescuer and World Leader, America the Purveyor of Global Prosperity could not accept foreign aid from others. That would be a most deflating and insulting role reversal. Were the French looking for another punch in the nose?
Besides, to have accepted foreign aid would have been to admit the truth---that the Bushite reactionaries had neither the desire nor the decency to provide for ordinary citizens, not even those in the most extreme straits. Next thing you know, people would start thinking that George W. Bush was really nothing more than a fulltime agent of Corporate America.
¿Qué pasa José Carlos, te has quedado mudo de emoción al ver al gobierno americano triumfar sobre los imponderables?
O, ¿es que todavía no has encontrado ningún blog "liberal" que te dé pistas para cargarle el muerto a los ecologistas, o a algún "socialista", o aunque sea a alguna oveja descarriada que todavía crea en el "estado del bienestar"? Para bienestar el de New Orleans, ¿verdad? Y para muestra de lo que es el "conservadurismo compasivo", miles de muertos de sed e inanición.
Así por lo menos habrá menos pobres en EEUU y las estadísiticas esas que tanto te gustan mejorarán.
¡Llevamos 6 dias huérfanos de directrices!
O, ¿es que todavía no has encontrado ningún blog "liberal" que te dé pistas para cargarle el muerto a los ecologistas, o a algún "socialista", o aunque sea a alguna oveja descarriada que todavía crea en el "estado del bienestar"? Para bienestar el de New Orleans, ¿verdad? Y para muestra de lo que es el "conservadurismo compasivo", miles de muertos de sed e inanición.
Así por lo menos habrá menos pobres en EEUU y las estadísiticas esas que tanto te gustan mejorarán.
¡Llevamos 6 dias huérfanos de directrices!
Yo, por ejemplo, "sobreviví" al penúltimo ciclón de fuerza cinco en Cuba. Un millón y medio de evacuados en los dos días anteriores y dos muertos.
Eso sí, me anularon durante dos días la reserva de coche de alquiler para disponer de todos lo medios, mientras me refugiaba en el hotel. Los doy por bien empleados.
Eso sí, me anularon durante dos días la reserva de coche de alquiler para disponer de todos lo medios, mientras me refugiaba en el hotel. Los doy por bien empleados.
Cambiando de tercio, supongo que habrás leído el interesante artículo del distinguido profesor de la renombrada Universidad George Mason y del inefable Cato Insitute en LD, donde plantea una "teoría" inédita de por qué los EEUU no aumentan su producción petrolera:
El Precio de la Gasolina
Ante tamaño descubrimiento, a lo mejor hasta puede que tengas que dejar a un lado las respuestas que me debes y optar por esta teoría que lo explica todo de la forma más simple y obvia posible. Es una lumbrera el Williams ese. Subidle el sueldo, que no se os escape de comentarista que vale su peso en oro. Como dice, no tiene pruebas, pero ¿es que hacen falta ante la luminosidad que emiten sus perspicaces ideas?
El Precio de la Gasolina
Ante tamaño descubrimiento, a lo mejor hasta puede que tengas que dejar a un lado las respuestas que me debes y optar por esta teoría que lo explica todo de la forma más simple y obvia posible. Es una lumbrera el Williams ese. Subidle el sueldo, que no se os escape de comentarista que vale su peso en oro. Como dice, no tiene pruebas, pero ¿es que hacen falta ante la luminosidad que emiten sus perspicaces ideas?
Al que sí tendrías que leerle la cartilla, en cambio, es a Emilio J. González quien también en LD se atreve a decir que:
Además, están apareciendo los primeros síntomas de un posible agotamiento de las reservas de petróleo. Los expertos en economía de los recursos energéticos empiezan a advertir de que los nuevos yacimientos de crudo que se están descubriendo no bastan para reemplazar al cien por cien la producción de aquellos otros que se están agotando. Por ello, hablan de que la curva del petróleo podría haber entrado en su fase descendente, después de haberse alcanzado el máximo de producción mundial en la década de los noventa. Sus estimaciones, a partir de las reservas conocidas actualmente, sugieren que queda oro negro para otros treinta años, aproximadamente. Por este motivo, desde diversos organismos internacionales, como el FMI o la OCDE, se pide a los países que no tomen medidas para compensar el alza del precio del petróleo, ya que la mejor forma de racionalizar su consumo, dado el panorama actual, es, precisamente, que el crudo sea caro. De todas formas, y sin pecar de optimista, hay que tener en cuenta que este tipo de previsiones fatales sobre el agotamiento de los recursos naturales y energéticos ya han fallado de manera ostentosa en el pasado, bien por los avances tecnológicos, bien porque, al final, se han encontrado nuevos yacimientos, aunque eso tampoco debe cegarnos ante la realidad que describen los expertos.
Adviértele que LD es un medio "liberal" y que eso no son ideas liberales, que creo que se le ha olvidado.
Además, están apareciendo los primeros síntomas de un posible agotamiento de las reservas de petróleo. Los expertos en economía de los recursos energéticos empiezan a advertir de que los nuevos yacimientos de crudo que se están descubriendo no bastan para reemplazar al cien por cien la producción de aquellos otros que se están agotando. Por ello, hablan de que la curva del petróleo podría haber entrado en su fase descendente, después de haberse alcanzado el máximo de producción mundial en la década de los noventa. Sus estimaciones, a partir de las reservas conocidas actualmente, sugieren que queda oro negro para otros treinta años, aproximadamente. Por este motivo, desde diversos organismos internacionales, como el FMI o la OCDE, se pide a los países que no tomen medidas para compensar el alza del precio del petróleo, ya que la mejor forma de racionalizar su consumo, dado el panorama actual, es, precisamente, que el crudo sea caro. De todas formas, y sin pecar de optimista, hay que tener en cuenta que este tipo de previsiones fatales sobre el agotamiento de los recursos naturales y energéticos ya han fallado de manera ostentosa en el pasado, bien por los avances tecnológicos, bien porque, al final, se han encontrado nuevos yacimientos, aunque eso tampoco debe cegarnos ante la realidad que describen los expertos.
Adviértele que LD es un medio "liberal" y que eso no son ideas liberales, que creo que se le ha olvidado.
Y si no dile por lo menos que no es cierto que "los expertos en economía de los recursos energéticos empiezan a advertir de que los nuevos yacimientos de crudo que se están descubriendo no bastan para reemplazar al cien por cien la producción de aquellos otros que se están agotando", ya que esto es de sobra conocido desde 1983, puesto que cada año desde entonces la cantidad de petróleo consumido ha sido superior al descubierto, como indica cualquier estadística que se hubiera dignado consultar.
Ah! y por si no lo sabes me llamo Marcel, como indica mi DNI. Tú en cambio no tienes ni la decencia de usar tu nombre verdadero escondiéndote como un vulgar ladrón con nicks tan reveladores como chocolatero o liberal_dogmatico. Pandilla de impresentables ...
No se admiten ya más comentarios.