Search the Community

What are the arguments for privatisation and deregulation in depth? Privatisation: So the argument against goes: "Health care, water and *insert utilitiy/'essential service* are there to help people not make a profit! A state monopoly can provide a service at cost and a business will provide it at a higher cost (cost + profit). Business will shaft the consumer and more importantly the poor" What are the practical arguments for privatisation? We tend to here things along the lines of: "governments have a horrible decision making progress and this makes them inefficient and always lagging behind business. Competition drives down prices and increases efficiency!" Then it just goes back and forth about X was privatized in Y country and now they're better off but X was also privatized in Z country and the state had to intervene. I guess what I'm asking is what is the logic behind the above, that makes a cost + profit business' better then a "cost only" state mandated monopoly on an essential service? We have the initial argument and evidence/counter evidence but what is the logic that explains it? Deregulation: What makes deregulating something cheaper? How does it allow for more business and more employment? Obviously people have less licensing and paperwork to worry about but what is the actual cost of regulation VS a self regulating market? Is it that business currently pays lawyers/accountants/auditors? Is it the cost of complying with government agencies that check products? (in that case is the only argument that a competitive market for agencies to check products/services cheaper/more efficient) Is it all about barriers erected for small business or the self employed? What barriers exactly? Just licensing?