[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

#4857: On public-private provision of goods: Poincy replies to Gina Ulysse (fwd)

From: caineve@idt.net

The Privates? involvement in changing Ayiti while the State is there to 
assist/monitor/regulate activities has nothing to do with philanthropy, 
redistribution, redistribution, total privatization, welfare system as 
understood in the US. In fact it is neither. It is mainly activities regarding 
the provision of public goods for which a co-operative type of membership will 
take place. In other words to enjoy the benefits of the needed public goods, 
those in need would enter in some arrangements that would allow them to become 
a member provided that certain conditions are fulfilled. 

Such a formation would not be exclusive, but limited in terms of the number of 
participants. That would make both exclusive and inclusive. This is not a 
contradiction: the fact that it would be limited to the number of participants 
makes it impossible for some to participate. However, anyone would have the 
right to join if the conditions are fulfilled and no additional member will 
cause congestion and affect the quality of the public good to be provided. This 
type could be replicated in small groups to cover a greater range of 
population. Determining the conditions of participation and the maximum number 
of participants are to be determined by the participants and the importance 
placed on the desired quality of the goods to be provided. Keep in mind that 
all participants would bear the cost to provide such goods.

Conceptually, it is neither of what GU is referring to in her inquiry. This 
form of private-public association has great potential to alleviate the pain of 
the population considering that Ayitian administrations are indifferent at all 
times. For instance, let?s take the provision of electricity. Ayitians keep 
pounding on the government without making any effort on their parts to improve 
their lot. Those who are tired of waiting on the government to do things go and 
buy inverters if they can afford it otherwise they are resigned to suffer.

Let?s say that in one block neighborhood of forty families, the neighbors 
decide to enter in an association that would provide electricity only for that 
area in light of the conditions outlined above. They would bear the cost of 
buying a generator, providing fuel and maintaining it. In being a member of 
this association all forty families would receive electricity as planned. 
Adding in the association a family in the next block with very close proximity 
to enjoy the benefits would not be without causing congestion and consequently 
altering the quality of the provision. For that family to be added, the 
capacity to provide electricity with the same quality would have to be 
increased. In that case the entire block could join. What of those who can?t 
bear the cost? Since the system would be set-up for that one block, those who 
could not afford sharing the cost would simply don?t enjoy the benefits. 

This is not a government neither a private project. It is that of a group of 
willing individuals that want to take in hands their own well-being rather than 
waiting for some international aids or the government to do what they can do 
for themselves. One can think of any other type of activities that can take 
this shape. Electricity is not the only one. The only role of government here 
is to back up such initiatives and provide security to prevent potential 
destruction. With the many inverters in one neighborhood, if those were 
thinking in that line, believe me things would be better and less expensive to 
maintain and everyone would have electricity. Aytians just don?t think that 

Ayiti has lived, lives and will live

This message was sent through IDT.