Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 7 Share on Twitter 1 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Best Web OpEds   

NeNeoliberal Privatizer David Osborne offers disinformation designed to fool the gullible; by Diane Ravitch

Quicklink Submitted By     (# of views)   1 comment, 12 series
Author 40790
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Susan Lee Schwartz
Become a Fan
  (24 fans)

The entire article by Osborne, (WaPO 6/19)  is straightforward disinformation -- his entire “argument,” rests on deliberately confusing the critical difference between the private & public spheres -- the very different aims, roles, and purposes of each! Public and private mean the opposite of each other, and are antonyms. Conceptual confusion flourishes & results in antisocial policies when these different categories are used carelessly! Public refers to everyone, the common good, the general interests of society & means  inclusive, open, and non-rivalrous. A public good is  benefits everyone, whether they use it or not. Private means exclusive, not inclusive, not shared... nor accessible by all.Osborne has been a relentless supporter of privately-operated low-transparency charter schools, which are notorious for being corrupt failures, unaccountable, segregated, & deunionized.'

Read the rest of the story HERE:

At dianeravitch.net

 

- Advertisement -

Rate It | View Ratings

Susan Lee Schwartz Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

I began teaching in 1963,; Ba and BS in Education -Brooklyn College. I have the equivalent of 2 additional Master's, mainly in Literacy Studies and Graphic Design. I was the only seventh grade teacher of English from 1990 -1999 at East Side (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Other Series: View All 544 Articles in "DON'T MISS THIS!"

Other Series: View All 196 Articles in "Ending democracy: end the institution of public schools"

Other Series: View All 44 Articles in "FAKE NEWS"

Other Series: View All 343 Articles in "FRAUD & Mendacity."

Other Series: View All 385 Articles in "PRIVITIZATION."

Other Series: View All 819 Articles in "Public ignorance & those who use this"

Other Series: View All 198 Articles in "War on teachers and the profession"

Other Series: View All 159 Articles in "WEALTH"

Other Series: View All 144 Articles in "wWonderful writing ....must reads"

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this quicklink has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments


Susan Lee Schwartz

Become a Fan
Author 40790

(Member since Oct 25, 2009), 24 fans, 17 articles, 3895 quicklinks, 7181 comments, 2 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

At this moment when our government is being purchased by corporate entities, this is such an important analysis by this brilliant historian, talking about our social structure... how it has been degraded as the right-wing GOP snort,"Socialism," so that they can impose predatory markets, and call it 'capitalism.'


In the Washington Post article, Osborne asks: "But if a publicly funded service is delivered by a private organization, does that make it a private service?"

Diane Ravitch , points out: "That is precisely what it means.

"Once the narrow private claims of owners of capital, who are obsessed with maximizing profit as fast possible, are imposed on public programs or services, it automatically reduces the claim of workers (the producers of wealth) and the claims of government (which is supposed to serve the public) on enterprise wealth. Public-Private "Partnerships" (PPPs), for example, are nothing more than a way to funnel public funds and assets to owners of capital under the veneer of high ideals. Neoliberals cover up this money grab by "arguing" ad nauseam that PPPs are good for competition, efficiency, results, and choice. PPPs are essentially pay-the-rich schemes.

"To put it another way, imposing private claims on public institutions, enterprises, and services necessarily means more public revenue for the private sector and less for the public sector. Workers and the government are the two main claimants on revenue in a public service. Once a third, private, alien claim is introduced, usually in the name of "choice," "competition," and "efficiency," this automatically reduces the amount of public revenue that goes to workers and the government (which is supposed to represent the public but often doesn't). Some of the revenues produced by working people must now go to an alien external claimant.


"Again, Osborne wants people to believe that publicly-funded but privately-operated services and programs are just fine, and that we should all stop complaining and just quietly embrace privatization. Osborne sees no problems with pay-the-rich schemes that harm the natural and social environment."

"Once the narrow private claims of owners of capital, who are obsessed with maximizing profit as fast possible, are imposed on public programs or services, it automatically reduces the claim of workers (the producers of wealth) and the claims of government (which is supposed to serve the public) on enterprise wealth. Public-Private "Partnerships" (PPPs), for example, are nothing more than a way to funnel public funds and assets to owners of capital under the veneer of high ideals. Neoliberals cover up this money grab by "arguing" ad nauseam that PPPs are good for competition, efficiency, results, and choice. PPPs are essentially pay-the-rich schemes."

Submitted on Friday, Jun 28, 2019 at 4:58:05 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Quicklink? Post Comment