Started By
Message
locked post

What's wrong with selling public assets?

Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:32 pm
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:32 pm
I've read several opinion pieces over the last few months that say it is wrong to sell public stuff to meet debts.

IE, Detroit is in the shitter. The Detroit Museum has some expensive art. But they can't sell it because it is 'immoral.'

Here is my hypothetical. Let's say that the Flint, Mich. Museum has a Picasso valued at 5M. Flint is 5M in the hole. Why shouldn't they be able to sell the Picasso and pay off the debt?

Is the buyer going to burn the Picasso just for fun? Are that many people in Flint going to be deprived of seeing it? Will it negatively effect their lives that much?
Posted by southernelite
Dallas
Member since Sep 2009
53177 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:50 pm to
If it was a private invidual, what do think the individual would be required to do by the government?


It shouldn't be any different, there are consequences to overspending and not being able to pay your bills. They should liquidate the whole mother fricker.
Posted by ehidal1
Chief Boot Knocka
Member since Dec 2007
37136 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:52 pm to
I agree. Hell, sell land and assets if need be

Eta: it's just another excuse by government to kick the can down the road. They want raised tax income, which makes them stronger. Not liquidating, which makes them weaker.

Maybe we should start garnishing the govt paychecks of those responsible so they help pay as well.
This post was edited on 6/15/14 at 2:54 pm
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
50529 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:53 pm to
I see no problem with it. All of the federal lands should be up for sle until the government pays down its debts.
Posted by Poodlebrain
Way Right of Rex
Member since Jan 2004
19860 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:53 pm to
The only assets the government should have are those necessary to perform its required functions. Selling assets that are going unused should be a no brainer.
Posted by CamdenTiger
Member since Aug 2009
62452 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 2:55 pm to
Part of me says no, because where would it end? Then , I say "But in reality we've sold our kids future, our own morality, and some of us have sold America's future, for pie in the sky politics, so they can feel good that their side is in charge...Hell, sell it all. What good is it all anyway, cause without freedom, its all a pile of s2#+, anyway...
Posted by Traffic Circle
Down the Rabbit Hole
Member since Nov 2013
4256 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 10:43 pm to
Sell Yellowstone National Park. Pay down the debt?
Posted by Old Hellen Yeller
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
9417 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 11:01 pm to
quote:

I see no problem with it. All of the federal lands should be up for sle until the government pays down its debts.


The park lands are one of the few things that haven't gone to shite in this country. No thanks
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
31507 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 11:36 pm to
quote:

Are that many people in Flint going to be deprived of seeing it?


they'd be more likely to steal or burn it.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
31507 posts
Posted on 6/15/14 at 11:37 pm to
quote:

The park lands are one of the few things that haven't gone to shite in this country. No thanks


also, what makes anyone think that the gov would use the proceeds to pay of debt? They are going to rack up astronomical debt regardless and for very little in return, so let's keep our parks and forests.
Posted by Helo
Orlando
Member since Nov 2004
4592 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 5:52 am to
Museums normally operate autonomously which is what the DIA is trying to do after this bankruptcy and not be part of the city government.

Individuals donate and museums procure items for future generations. Selling Yellowstone, the Washington Monument or the Declaration of Independence doesn't sound particularly appealing to me.
Posted by redandright
Member since Jun 2011
9619 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 6:04 am to
One issue that was only recently brought to light is how much land the Federal Government owns.

The logging industry is states such as Idaho, has been brought to a virtual standstill because of the restriction on logging on Public Lands.

LINK
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 6:28 am to
quote:


Maybe we should start garnishing the govt paychecks of those responsible so they help pay as well.


GOvernment workers.

I forgot about those.

Usually when I think of right wing lunatics, I think of people with three main goals (in no particular order) 1) protect the wealthy 2) protect the bigots 3) shame the poor. But I forget 4) - shame people who work for the People. Obviously, when the People mismanage their money - they should take it out on the folks they hired to do work for them. That's fair.


If Detroit ever has extra cash are you going to be clamouring for raises for government workers? Of course not - government workers should only get a profit share if its negative - just like in the private sector!
This post was edited on 6/16/14 at 6:30 am
Posted by rintintin
Life is Life
Member since Nov 2008
16182 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 6:40 am to


Your posts have become caricature like.
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
79717 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 6:42 am to
quote:

Usually when I think


Your head hurts. Think less.

quote:

If Detroit ever has extra cash




Pipe dream.

Now put down the pipe.
This post was edited on 6/16/14 at 6:44 am
Posted by a want
I love everybody
Member since Oct 2010
19756 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:49 am to
quote:

Sell Yellowstone National Park. Pay down the debt?



Posted by baybeefeetz
Member since Sep 2009
31638 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:54 am to
I'm pretty sure you posted this exact thread a while back.

Eta LINK

At least once
This post was edited on 6/16/14 at 7:57 am
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57245 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 8:16 am to
Nothing. LSU sold off a bunch of land south of campus a few years ago.
Posted by lsu13lsu
Member since Jan 2008
11484 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 9:03 am to
quote:

I've read several opinion pieces over the last few months that say it is wrong to sell public stuff to meet debts.


I read the last night that we had $200 + Trillion in public assets so it is irrelevant what our unfunded liabilities are. I am not sure if that is true and have not seen it anywhere reliable. But, if we have that much in assets then why are we getting taxed?!
Posted by The Third Leg
Idiot Out Wandering Around
Member since May 2014
10052 posts
Posted on 6/16/14 at 9:10 am to
Like when Chicago sold it's parking system rights? Maybe an Arab wealth fund will swoop in and buy Detroit. Wouldn't that be nice?

Looks like selling public assets at absurd discounts worked well for Russia when the USSR collapsed, privatization by way of shady deals. I mean, look at all those new billionaires.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram