One of leftist’s favorite things to say about the private sector is that it is “for-profit.” Because private businesses are all about making money, they will do anything to stuff the pockets of their share-holders and company big-wigs. The simple desire to profit automatically renders them unscrupulous demons, of whom can only be slayed by the angels of the all-omniscient, all-omnipotent public sector. Government is the figure of authority, so that means they have good intentions in their hearts and we can use them to rid society of all ailments, right? This could not be further from the truth.
A wise Frenchman once said: “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?” This is, of course, because government itself is a corporation, not unlike the oh-so-morbid private sector entities that socialists love to paint horns onto. In order to fund the services government provides, they will need money. In order to make these services free to the public, they will need a considerable sum of money, and as the old Japanese proverb goes: There is nothing more expensive than something free. This is where things like mass-extortion (taxation), asset forfeiture, public auctions, and fines for crimes come into play.
As many people know (and that many others will ardently deny), police do in fact have ticket quotas. Don’t believe me? Ask Justin Hanners, the Auburn, Alabama police officer who was fired for speaking out against such quotas. The reason officers have ticket quotas is to generate revenue for things such as paychecks, new police equipment, and whatever else you’d imagine a police department needing money for. This is also why drug prohibition has continued for so long despite statistics, scientific evidence, and public opinion largely outweighing the long-parroted “think of the children!” argument. Asset forfeiture benefits police because many times, police can get away with confiscating money without any evidence of a crime, as indicated by the story of a man named Dale Agostini. Targeting drug users, along with other people who commit non-violent actions (eg; speeding, not wearing a seat belt, disobeying some pointless and/or possibly illegal law, amongst others), is more profitable than hard crimes like murder and theft, chiefly because they occur more often and more people do those actions. With their incentives pointed elsewhere than enforcing justice, they open up a larger playing field for revenue generation, and thus can spend the money earned from these “criminals” on things such as weapons, vehicles, and their 401Ks.
Even more bestially depraved are things such as the military-industrial-complex, the prison-industrial-complex, and even Child Protection Services. The same leftists who mock the private sector, ironically enough, also call out the Bush administration for their various war crimes that were committed in the name of profit (Halliburton, the whole “let’s raid their country and take their oil” thing, etc). In Pennsylvania, there was a judge by the name of Mark Ciavarella Jr. who received millions in bribes to sentence minors to maximum sentences. Why’d he do it? Because longer sentences mean more money for both the state and the private prison industry, of course. Carol Rhodes, a CPS insider and author of the book “Friend of the Court, Enemy of the Family”, once explained that CPS is in the business of confiscating children, and that employees are gauged based on how much money they brought in.
Time and time again, it has been proven on both the local and federal levels that law enforcement agents are more likely to misbehave and disregard their Constitutional oaths when they themselves can directly profit from incriminating people. Because the public sector is managed by the “authority figures”, the general public is almost completely helpless to legally challenge the many injustices of government. In that regard, it could be argued that government greed is more insidious and nefarious than private sector greed. Where the private sector merely exploits the authority of the ruling class (ie; government), government actually goes so far as to claim some sort of divine right to rule and oppress the serf class as they see fit. Despite these facts, however, the socialists will continue to blame the free market as if it is the only thing capable of the morbidity that is morally-unfettered greed.