Well, the Post Office does have the advantage of having had Congress outlaw any competition. I’ll bet GE could be more profitable if they got that.
How about the DMV as an example of what governmental efficiency is like?
Leftists who attack the WTO and the IMF frequently do so in the name of democracy and “local control.” That is, when the WTO and IMF lend money to a country, there are often major strings attached. Example: a nation will have to get inflation and deficits under control.
In the abstract, that’s wonderful. In the real world, getting inflation under control may mean government austerity, the kind that leads to genuine poverty and suffering among the peoples in an affected country.
Many foes of the WTO/IMF say that “globalization” prevents indivisual governments from making their own choices as to how to run their economies. Example: an African country committed to state-socialism is unlikely to get much support (moral or financial) from the WTO/IMF. Thus, “globalization” can prevent nations from pursuing the policies they prefer.
All true… except that I can’t remember seeing any of these leftists complain when “globalization” worked in their favor. Example: the European Economic community effectively FORCED ENgland to admit gays into the military, and FORCED Turkey to abandon capital punishment. Question: since impersonal, global forces forced sovereign nations to do their bidding… why didn’t the supposed “anti-globalists” oppose the EEC?
Answer: leftists DON’T oppose “globalization,” per se… only when it suits them.