Investors may fund social programs

[SecularMotion]

Source: Boston.com

Massachusetts could be among the first states in the country to raise money for social services by offering investors the chance to earn profits on programs they establish.

The approach is known as “social impact bonds’’ or “pay for success.’’ It is based on the idea that if programs backed by investors succeed in reducing, for example, the number of inmates in prison or the homeless population, governments will realize big savings, which they can tap to pay off investors with healthy returns. If the programs fail, the government would owe little or nothing.

The administration of Governor Deval Patrick is already sifting through more than two dozen suggestions from nonprofits on how to create such performance-based programs.

“We have a new fiscal reality in state government,’’ said Jay Gonzalez, the Massachusetts secretary of administration and finance. “We have to find a way to become more effective.’’

Read more: http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/06/27/massachusetts_others_eye_new_model_to_fund_social_programs/

[Mojambo]

1. Great. Can't wait to see what a Prisoner Release Bubble looks like. n/t

[msongs]

2. street fighting man - the rolling stones. nt

[DJ13]

3. How can putting a profit driven layer between the government & services

save money?

[Liberal Veteran]

4. Gosh...just look at the success of the health care industry.

:sarcasm:

[jwirr]

10. Health insurance!

[Autumn]

5. Just another transfer of our tax dollars to

the corporations. It won't save the people money but it sure will help out some corporation.

[Bgno64]

13. Yep.

[emsimon33]

6. OMG! Making money from the poor. That's why the rich and

corporations want a nation of poor, a nation in poverty: So they can make profits off them!!!!! What have we become as a nation?????????

[aquart]

17. Nothing we were intended to be.

We were supposed to be a haven of opportunity.

All these policies crush opportunity and innovation.

[emsimon33]

7. The growth of private prisons has seem and exponential growth

in those who are imprisoned!!!!! The logic is all wrong!

[unkachuck]

8. "...earn profits on programs they establish."

....I'm so glad....corporations can now cause and cure poverty at the same time and profit from both....

....is there nothing the free market can't do?....except maybe create an abundance of meaningful jobs.

[jwirr]

9. I do not understand this idea that no other states contract with private

sources to fulfill social services needs. Here in MN we have Medicare/Medicaid/MN Care and Medical Part D through insurance companies. We also have sheltered work shops for persons who are developmentally disabled that are run by private organizations. The work shops are often partially financed by businesses.

I take it that the difference is that the government will not be in charge of any of the rules and regulations. That leaves the for profits in charge of the hen house. I guess we need to learn the hard way.

[Bragi]

11. Can I buy the parole board?

If so, that's great, I can save the taxpayer millions, maybe even billions, by releasing prisoners with little likelihood of re-offending.

What about the justice system? Can I buy that too? Or even just a piece of it?

This seems really well thought out.

[Liberal Veteran]

12. Yes, but you also have to buy Marvin Gardens and build some hotels to get a return.

:P

[Bragi]

19. Deal!

I presume these acquisitions will, as usual, be 100 per cent taxpayer financed and guaranteed, right?

[999998th word]

23. Do you mean the SCOTUS

You're a little late on that one.It's been sold.

[Bragi]

31. I missed the bidding process on that one

How about the public defender system? I could eliminate that and save a bundle. The only group adversely effected would be poor people, who have no political champions, so they don't count for anything.

[liberal N proud]

14. And next time the stock market goes in the tank

Catastrophe in the making!

[applegrove]

15. Private prisons are greasing the palms of judges to get more clients. That is what happens. Some

social programs are much better administered and provided by government. Like universal health care is cheaper than private.

[aquart]

16. Give them profits instead of taxes?

Are they completely insane?

[woo me with science]

18. Good god. Profit off the poor. I bet if we all thought really hard

we could imagine what these programs might look like.

[awoke_in_2003]

21. "Profit off the poor"...

been going on for years- now they are just making it blatant.

[999998th word]

24. That privatizing everything is bullshit

They don't even try to hide it anymore,anything for a buck squeeze as much out of this as they can.

Doesn't matter how they attained this kind of power,SCOTUS took care of that.

They are that comfortable with the knowledge all of our avenues for legal recourse have been undermined.

Shitbag parasites.

[blueclown]

20. Ah, the "wonders of the private sector".

The private sector has never done anything more efficiently or cheaply than state or federal governments.

Call it what it is: "future privatization".

[boppers]

22. Aside from:

Delivering packages
Making products
Distributing goods
Communicating information
...

Centrally planned and run economic experiments have been run all over the globe. Every single one failed.

Every.

Single.

One.

[blueclown]

26. Delivering packages?

Fedex and UPS have cherrypicked the profitable routes. Meanwhile, USPS has to pick up the scraps and does so very well. Don't buy into the right-wing frame that USPS is failing.

And I think your oversimplification of how every single central planned government has failed belongs on Free Republic. Are you sure you don't belong there?

[plumbob]

29. Never really compared USPS to UPS or FedEx on both price and

performance, have you?

Do. The post office delivers packages far more quickly at a fraction of the cost. And I'm not guessing, nor do I have a small sample. We mail 12-30 packages every week day.

Do I take this as an admission that private companies don't: plan from a central location (then what's a board for?) nor run from a central location (then what's a home office for?)

There's a very limited variety of ways to make or do any service. The only difference is that the "private" sector (which always needs a bailout or other government guarantee when they get in trouble, as they always do) has to add a layer of "profit" to anything done by anyone else.

By definition, that's going to cost more, unless they can bully people into working for less than they would in a government operation. The money can't come from anywhere else - those commodity salesfolk are damn sure not going to cut you a deal. I think you need to see how you've framed to look at things and take a fresh look at the actual mechanisms.

[Bragi]

30. Germany, France, Sweden, Canada, etc. are all failed states?

All those countries have far more central planning and government control over the private sector than the U.S.A, which is the worlds most free market, private money-friendly country in the world. And the U.S is now failing economically.

Maybe your pro-market ideology and belief in unfettered capitalism needs a bit of an update.

[WatsonT]

33. The statement was that the private sector does *nothing* better than the government

for Germany, Canada, etc to be good examples they would need to have every aspect of their society run by the government with no private sector at all.

Clearly that isn't the case.

The private market is good at providing things that people want under certain conditions.

[blank space]

25. Sorry people im confused

what did you think the war on social programs was about ? Did you seriously think it was about ending them.

Naomi Klein and Chomsky, to start with the basics, have been SCREAMING at you for over a decade that this is the plan, to privatized social programs.

It chills me to my core that you have not absorbed this yet.


George Bush privatised the Texan social security programs while still governor and handed them over to Raytheon, hands up who did not know this ?!!


One BILL CLINTON could not believe the bold face greed and vetoed the entire program. got that ?

So this pissed a lot of people of, Bush came to washington, yadda, yadda - here we are today,

This is important guys, the union busting is not simply about destroying workers, it is about total transfer of the governmnet to the private sector - the entire process is almost complete - there is very, very little left to do in order complete the entire transfer of government to the private sector, the military is already done, ....


HAND.

[No Elephants]

28. The same Bill Clinton who recently offered his help to Congressman Ryan, I take it.

[No Elephants]

27. Mass. has a Democratic Governor and an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature.

Governor Duval Patrick, an alum of the Clinton administration, made a bundle courtesy of banks with questionable practices, had his first gubernatorial campaign managed by David Axelrod (yes, we chanted "Yes, We Can" and heard "Just words" about two years before the rest of y'all did) and served as campaign co-chair for the 2008 Obama Presidential campaign.

Sorry, but as a resident of the only state that voted against Nixon, ya just gotta cringe.

Aren't the Democratic Party's new clothes splendid? What do mean, you can't see them? Well, you know what that means. Anyone who can't see them is not a sensible, pragmatic Democrat, so more's the shame on you.

[guitar man]

32. Oh boy

I'm sure this will end well :eyes:

[iemitsu]

34. if this is a workable plan

why aren't all tax-payers paid dividends for their investments into all government programs?

[CatholicEdHead]

35. Doomed to fail

Social justice through the profit motive always means the profit will come out on top. It is not any form of charity when you profit off them. Is that what we have been reduced too as a country? We will not help anyone unless we can get something out of it?

[fascisthunter]

36. FAIL....

economic brainwashing... I see the "Privatization agenda" is still in full-fledge, but never admit it is why this country's economy is so fucked up... no never do that.

[shanti]

37. this will not turn out well

for the poor :(