That was brilliant!

No joke, I was literally just about to post that video on your wall!

That video was funny, but unsuprising, considering how many people you can get to sign petitions to ban water.

I'm not sure he was.

I think if he was alive today he wouldn't be a "Keynesian."

It's worth noting the HUGE sociological differences between people today, and the generation the US fondly calls "The Greatest Generation."

Change "or" to "=" on that second shirt, then it would be accurate.

Yes, because being the true master of your property and voluntarily exchanging it with others for mutual benefit is equal to serfdom.

Well I, for one, agree with privatizing everything. The only roles of government should be national defence and protecting us from others (police/courts), everything else can be done much more efficiently and cost effectively if privatized.

Too much market freedom leads to the same thing that too much civil freedom leads to: tyranny of the minority who are blessed or unscrupulous (or both) enough to be able to monopolize power. Not all property being created equal, those who control the means of production manipulate those who have only their labor to offer, and can thus place them in perpetual bondage as surely as the fief-lords of old.

Freedom and intervention need balancing.

Corporations are very bad at providing services with natural monopolies.

- You can only realistically run one water pipe to a house
- You can only realistically run one set of trains
- You can only realistically have one primary (elementary) school for a given area, otherwise young children will have school travel times of >1/2 an hour

How this is usually done for the first two is a N-year contract is awarded, and then (and I have hundreds of back issues of UK's Private Eye with evidence) they can charge what they want with no fear of business dropping, and never invest in infrastructure because they're looking for a gain within N years. 

You can have lots of regulatory oversight to counteract this but honestly the corporate profit margin + large regulatory bodies + very badly written contracts because civil servants don't care about how much the government spends on procuring something so they get a bad deal is less efficient than a state owned service.

Knowing some /things/ about the defence industry as I do (adding up to, well, hundreds of millions in wasted tax money), NOTHING is less efficient than public bodies contracting private companies. Even a completely private system monopoly is better.