A serious question to you. If the public sector can’t afford to provide for pensions and benefits, how can the private sector? If the private sector doesn’t do this or provide for these functions in their wage base what is the alternate consequence?
Without some kind of health plan, disability plan and retirement savings program we end up with people for whom sickness resulting in a long or short term inability to work or old age is more-or-less a death sentence. Certainly all of these things can be provided by some kind of private insurance programs but it still has to be paid for.
Many people in the labor class are taking home a just adequate living wage. Others are more prosperous but still probably do not generate enough excess cash to provide the benefits they need.
Fedex manages much of their cost by an army of part-time workers who have no benefits.
For there to be any savings in labor cost as a result of privatization benefits have to be fewer or somehow less costly. So, the question is, by what means are labor costs cut and with what long term consequence to the general well being. If one does not care about this any solution is acceptable.
The means should be the free market, the amount should be the free market clearing price for labor and benefits.
The long term consequence is a healthier economy, which benefits everyone, instead of just a select few.
I know you didn’t ask me, but the answer is the private sector can’t afford it either. You are looking for a way for us to keep our entitlements and improve our lifestyles. It can’t be done. What was done before was false and temporary. The private sector can do things cheaper, faster and better, but not enough better to pay for that entire wish list of yours.
Our standard of living is going to be lower until we have some large technological breakthroughs with health and/or energy.
People, even conservatives, keep looking for a painless way out of this situation. There isn’t one. Get ready for pain and suffering unless you are rather wealthy.