09-29-2016, 08:18 AM
I think the main point of contentions for many people is extortionate pricing in the face of poor service and large profits for directors and shareholders. We have to ask questions of the morality of this, especially as privatisation has not always worked in the interests of the consumer.
There are really only two options, nationalisation of more robust regulation.
Admittedly there is a cost to nationalisation, but it would provide services solely run in the interests of the country as a whole. Therefore the outlay could eventually be returned if managed correctly.
Robust regulation would work, and the difficulties of bringing this about are quite easily addressed. It would provide the competition and market forces to reduce costs to the public, whilst at the same time not allow companies the freedom to exploit their position.
Looking at things another way, without robust regulation the country becomes the servant of business, a tail wagging the dog situation. Something we simply cannot afford.
There are really only two options, nationalisation of more robust regulation.
Admittedly there is a cost to nationalisation, but it would provide services solely run in the interests of the country as a whole. Therefore the outlay could eventually be returned if managed correctly.
Robust regulation would work, and the difficulties of bringing this about are quite easily addressed. It would provide the competition and market forces to reduce costs to the public, whilst at the same time not allow companies the freedom to exploit their position.
Looking at things another way, without robust regulation the country becomes the servant of business, a tail wagging the dog situation. Something we simply cannot afford.