| Armads said:
Honestly I wouldn't want any of my utilities to be completely privitized and they're not, the FCC regulates telephones, without their regulations the available phone service of landline phones would be akin to cell phones and the prices would likely be a lot higher. In the energy sector we saw what happened when we allowed a company free roam, that company was enron and they basically just squeezed profits from california by shutting off power for no reason other than the fact that when people are without power for a little while they are much more willing to pay higher prices to get it back and it was all legal at that time. How would you like it if your power or water or phones were shut off for a week just so that you would be more willing to pay an exorbitantly higher price for them? |
One of the primary reasons why costs of services can increase when they're privatized in developed nations is because these services are being subsidized by the government when they are run by the government. With public insurance, electricity and many other utilities, and countless other crown corporations, the actual costs of the service are hidden from users. If you account for the actual cost to the end user (including taxes) for government run services the private sector rarely costs more.
With that said, claiming that a private corporation can provide a better product/service for less than the government can offer that same service for is not (necessarily) a statement that the private corporation should be completely unrestricted in how they offer that service. In most cases private corporations operating under the supervision of the government (where the government acts like a referee) can provide nearly ideal outcomes. Simple/well thought out regulations and effective/efficient oversight over private corporations will provide far better outcomes than the government operating a service.
