Utopia, parental society or free-riding pays off
…After receiving cash fee for his rather late works on restoring water supply, municipal plumber promptly promised to the lawyer to be always available, and to provide consultancy on plumbing.
The liberal ideology fully blossoms here:”From everyone according to his ability, to everyone according to his needs”. For keeping Utopia to ourselves I’ll keep its location discreet.
“poor folk, peoples beneficial for society
are entitled to benefits… It might be the way to earn money”
Certainly, it is a plumber’ paradise, and surely, it is a place of universal proletariat happiness. Parental government protects certain peoples from cradle to grave. Mothers are funded by government for 3 years from birth of a child, on top of lump sum to be paid for the birth of each baby. Each low-income household may successfully qualify for municipal payment’ holidays and state benefits on public utilities services’ payments. Not only poor folk, but peoples beneficial for society (“children of war”, specific types of pensioners, etc.) are entitled to aforesaid benefits. It might be the way to earn money, as to receive government funding equal to cost of public utility services they fail to consume (for instance, natural gas).
“50% of households in capital city are on budget benefits”
Intentions are good; in practice everyone who does not consider himself lazy might undeservingly benefit from society. As a result, 50% of households in capital city of the country are on budget benefits. And several rises in the row of public utilities tariffs made even stronger incentive to cheat the system. The new sport is public utilities payments optimization. The system is Utopially prone to cheating.
Free riders and the rest
Still another half of households (mostly scarce bourgeoisie middle-class) play fair – they work hard and pay taxes, declaring all income to tax authorities. As a result, they are not eligible to state benefits to cover household expenses on public utilities and building maintenance’ services.
“… another half of households (middle-class) pay for themselves,
as well as for free-riders and for those who are on budget”
Furthermore, they pay for themselves, as well as for free-riders and for those who are on budget. In addition to this social unfairness, the formulas for state – regulated tariffs calculation on public services allow for substantial losses of output (up to 30%), as well as include billing and paperwork costs (that are to be reimbursed by households as part of their tax). Somebody shall cover all these. A scarce middle-class.
Games for majority of downtown households
While bourgeoisie households pay for building maintenance to local municipal service provider on monthly basis, this provider may have no assets, nor skilled labour, when it comes to fulfill its obligations. Needless to say, households are forbidden to choose alternative to local municipal service provider without receiving prior written consent of municipality.
“It takes to acquire constructions of the buildings into
private ownership for municipality consent
to choose a service provider”
For obtaining this municipality consent, households should firstly acquire capital constructions of the buildings into private ownership. In fact, recent law mandates transition of municipality property – grids and capital constructions of the buildings into ownership of households. Thus, households shall undergo complicated procedure, were the first step is to carry out a General meeting of elected Householders Committee of the building. (Just imagine result of majority vote electing a head of Household Committee by 75 years old auntie Roza and her friends-dwellers of a building). After mastering corporate – governance games, households should register their Household Entity in a government register.
Though, households of newly constructed buildings are free of this drawback: building assets are new, majority of home-owners are under 50, a building shall be put into exploitation with “embedded” state-registered Household Entity.
“quite a few downtown buildings here were built
more than 50 years ago, and have not been properly maintained
for the last 25 years“
Incidentally, quite a few downtown buildings here were built more than 50 years ago, and have not been properly maintained for the last 25 years. Until recently it was next to impossible to transfer into private ownership capital asset-structures of buildings, as law required prior renovation for the municipality expense. However, this condition has already disappeared from the law.
Take it, or leave it or forced crowd-funding for middle-class
That is why downtown home-owners are not in hurry taking hold of obsolete assets of buildings. Down-town house-holds are coping with frequent emergency situations by cashing local municipal services on top of monthly fee. They may not be ready to carry the full load of municipality bad debts For municipal services providers it is handy way to stay in business, enjoying such an voluntarily bourgeoisie’ “crowed-funding”. Surely, greasing the palm, or rather palms of plumbers and carpenters, could be more attractive ….
To be continued….
