ATC and Water

I don't know how long this podcast link will work but it won't matter in the long run.  Hopefully, the screen shot will help those in the future find the episode (on the remote chance anyone might be interested).

The lead story is about an air traffic control system data processing problem that snarled the United Kingdom's air traffic control system on August 28, 2023.  It sounds a lot like a problem (or two) the Federal Aviation Administration's system has suffered in the past.  I don't know.  And I want to make it clear I am not the least bit familiar with the United Kingdom's air traffic control system.  It did delay my daughter's flight.  And I also know how to read.  Not to mention, I have a memory.  

From Wikipedia:

"NATS Holdings, formerly National Air Traffic Services and commonly referred to as NATS, provides en-route air traffic control services to flights within the UK flight information regions and the Shanwick Oceanic Control Area.[2] It also provides air traffic control services to 14 UK airports.

The company's en-route business is regulated and operated under licence from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).[3]"

Now, if you really want a better understanding of all this, read the whole entry.  My point begins with this part.

"Ownership

In 1998, a public-private partnership was proposed. This was written into the Transport Act 2000 and in 2001 51% of NATS was transferred to the private sector. However, due to the decline in air traffic following the September 11, 2001 attacks £130m of additional investment was required, £65m coming each from the UK government and BAA, which received 4% of the company in return.[6]
As a public-private partnership the UK government holds 49% and a golden share, with 42% held by the Airline Group, 5% by NATS staff, and 4% by UK airport operator LHR Airports Ltd.[7]"

The older readers will recognize immediately that we've hit upon the public policy fight of our generation:  Privatization. (Or privatisation if you don't speak American.)  For the new (or younger) readers, it is essential you understand this ideological fight -- for your future existence.  So, if you don't know about Margaret Thatcher and her buddy, Ronald Reagan, you have some reading to do.

Thatcherism:

"Thatcherism attempts to promote low inflation, the small state and free markets through tight control of the money supply, privatisation and constraints on the labour movement. It is often compared with Reaganomics in the United States..."

Before your eyes glaze over from the gobbledygook, the key is the "small state" through "privatisation".  In other words, they wanted a smaller government that sold all the Public assets to private business, thus making billionaires.  Some of which, (certainly the sum of which) would be nearly as powerful as the Government.  

I know it sounds fantastical but, in reality, they were recreating the robber-barons of the late 1800s -- Rockefeller, J.P.Morgan, Carnegie and Mellon.  (Oh, and if you didn't catch the part about ATC, Reagan and "Labour", well..., you should have.) You know, just like the Musk, Gates, Bezos and Buffet of today.  If anybody could actually compete with them, they bought them out.  And they were so good at what they did, so "smart", they assumed -- because they could make money -- they could run the world.  (Why not?)  A lot of other people bought into that idea.  Even when the guy that said he was good at making money wasn't.

My, my.  We've wandered far afield from the United Kingdom partially,  sort-of, semi-privatizing their air traffic control system haven't we?  Well, the thing I actually wanted you to notice is the next story (at exactly 30 seconds) in that podcast.  (Here. So you won't have to scroll back up.) 

"The Government plans to scrap water pollution protection laws in England to allow more house building..."

It took us roughly forty years to get from Thatcher/Reagan to Trump/Musk.  It's been the theme throughout my life.  You never really know where these things are coming from.  Sometimes, they come from left field.  <--- (Psst, you really want to lick on that link.)  And the first thing you know, ol' Ted's a billionaire.

(A Different Ted)

If you think it's bad when the airlines run out of airplanes (the recovery portion of any disruption), what do you think it will be like when your privatized water company runs out of clean water to sell you?

 Sometimes, it really is that simple, if you can think clearly.  Which is more important -- a house or clean water?  Yes, it is very easy to take clean water for granted.  After all, the vast majority of governments do it so well you never think about it.  (There's a lesson in that.)  But on a survival level, which is more important?  We see people almost every day living without a house.  Nobody lives (long) without clean water.

It might take 40 years for other folks to catch on but you can beat the rush.  Get the Flick now.  If you don't like your Government, you have the power to change it.  If you don't like that Elon Musk bought Twitter, tough.  Yes, you can go elsewhere.  Until he has a monopoly.  Then you're stuck.  With Amazon, WalMart, ATT and Google.  Twitter is one thing.  You might want to think twice before you let a private company have your water.  Or your hospital. (Guess which subject is next.)

Don Brown
September 2, 2023