I believe (as do others) that a few smart people have reframed arguments about public vs private as free market vs government. It is a way of keep us from looking at the concrete failures and the greed of the private sector, and to have us argue the merits of the free market --- in which regulation and/or public ownership/participation is really not anathema. ----- here is a post starter I used someplace else: "I referenced this article in a few posts earlier this week. No one seems to have picked up on it because I assume they do not read the WSJ. I am surprised as so many here speak about economic issues." I added "my point is that the free market is often pretty ugly. imagine if this were health care?" "many of the rah rah free marketers often blame government for NOT regulating them well enough" here is the WSJ linked article... later on I added this after seeing more than a few views yet no comments from the loud font crowd of speech makers and blowhards: is it possible to get the boobs who always mention the free market to rationally debate private vs public approaches to different issues without them resorting to boogy men, straw man arguments, scare tactics and hooey about socialism, communism and other silly isms?