WHY NOT PUBLICLY OWNED?

When it comes to life essential commodities, like energy, food, water and healthcare, why should the public not be allowed to own the rights to produce and provide them? We do not live in a constitutionally mandated PURELY capitalistic society. As a federal republic, with democratic governing principles, we are an ever vacillating blend of national characteristics and features. We foster socialistic mechanisms such as a national military, national education system, municipal police forces, municipal energy suppliers and so much more. At the same time, the public pays for business promotional departments within our government. (And why, should the public be paying business's promotion, p.r. and advertising? We protect business copyrights, patents and intellectual property. So, we are neither purely capitalistic, socialistic or purely any other "istic".

But, whenever the issue is raised of the public owning and operating any product, service or commodity, thereby competing with monopolistic corporations, and their profits, business crIes and screams FOUL! They shout "GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER!" and "GOVERNMENT CONTROL!",... What that truly means is, they don't want the public providing anything for themselves, because that would lessen they're access to our money in the form of their profits.

For decades now, the public has been "subsidizing" Big Oil both directly and indirectly. Europeans complain that we Americans are spoiled because of the cheap oil which we have been using for decades. But what they don't realize, is that in addition to the tax rebate subsidies we give Big Oil, we also subsidize them with our military efforts to protect their interests throughout the Middle East and elsewhere! To that point, we have been effectively subsidizing Europe's access to cheap oil. No other country spends trillions of dollars to protect oil interests the was the U.S. public does.

The point is, if we stop spending trillions to subsidize Big Oil, we can divert that money to a publicly owned, national buildout of alternative energy sources and supply services. Has the public not lost enough time and money, to ignore the possibility of doing and providing a few things for ourselves?

The truth is, that countries with national healthcare have better overall health than average Americans. And, their public is unanimously happy with national healthcare. But, Big Corporate Healthcare, along with Big Insurance, freaking out at the possibility that they might not be able to continue raping the public, shout, yell, kick, scream, protest and pay for protest, at the very mention of the public owning the process and delivery of healthcare. They try to discolor it as socialism, communism and even a sin against God. And all because they're afraid that their cash cow will stop producing fresh cream.

Have we, the American public, not created enough huge corporations, hugh corporate profits, multi millionaires from investing in those corporations? And what do we have to show for it in the end? Unaffordable insurance, insurance cancellation, pre-existing conditions exclusions and satellite sky high medical care costs. To top it off, reports from other than extreme right/corporate spin meisters say that we do not provide the best medical care in the world. But I bet we pay more than any other country for medical care, per capita.

Fellow Americans, have we not created enough wealth for others, to finally deserve providing life's necessities for ourselves, saving great sums of money in the process? Of course, vested corporate interests will deluge us with trumped up and falsified fact and figures suggesting that providing services and products for ourselves will cost us more than if they do it. While it is almost always false; in part because the hidden costs are never factored in, would you be willing to pay a few percent more to be guaranteed that you will always have access to that product or service when you need it? If you need a heart transplant, isn't it worth having spent a few cents more to make sure that you could have it, when you need it? If we had prolonged subzero weather, requiring unusual amounts of energy, wouldn't it be worth having spent a few cents more to make sure that you have access to as much of it as you want when you need it? and yet, it is usually nothing more that corporate propaganda, typically espoused by the extreme corporate/right, that suggests it would cost us more if we provide it for ourselves. This always makes me laugh and wonder, do the not anticipate that we will consider their profit margins as part of the costs to us for their products and services?

While very few Americans would want, or tolerate, complete communism or socialism, the public providing some of life's most essential products and services for ourselves, is neither one of the two. I think it's time we should start paying ourselves a little money. Let the corporations create other products and services to supply us, if we choose to consume them, and earn their fortunes that way. There is something a little insidious about putting the control of life's essentials in the hands of what has become, corporate vampires.