If Govt was scaled back to the point where most everything was privatized, would the result be monopolies?

Question

Do people really expect corporations to all of a sudden play fair? No monopolies (or oligopolies) would rule and you, the consumer, would not get the lower price because of competition, because one company would be raping you for you're worth because they're the only ones who provide water and have bought out everyone else!

Answer 1

Exactly.

At least a government-run monopoly is accountable to the public.

Anyway, you just ignore the entire moral argument as to is it actually right to allow companies to profit from human needs and rights, such as water

Answer 2

If EVERYTHING was privatized, to include the courts, police, and military, then what you describe is possible.

But very few people advocate complete anarcho-capitalism. Suppose that we just scaled back the government to the limits imposed by the U.S. Constitution. I do not think that would lead to the kind of nightmare scenario you are describing.

No matter how big or welathy a corporation might be, they can never force anyone to do anything. Only governments can use force. All a corporation can do is offer you their good or service in exchange for somethign you have...a voluntary transaction.

It's pretty far fetched to think that ONE company would own everything. Just imagine that we lived in a world of limited government, and some big company (i.e. Wal Mart) started buying up water sources. Other big companies would notice this, so then Microsoft and Coca Cola and Halliburton would start buying up water too. GE would work on developing a cheap desalinization machine, or even a water synthesis machine, to get the advantage over everyone else.

Competition would prevent anyone from getting a stranglehold on the world.

Answer 3

In theory, this would make sense. But in reality, this has proven to be incorrect. When you subject service providers to an open market in the capitalist society, it will create competition amongs the providers.

In Canada, when the telephone companies and the Hydro providers were governmentally owned/controlled, the notion of a monopoly existed. Once it was privatized, prices came into line with what the market would bear...freedom of competition delivered the lowest prices those industries had seen in decades!

Answer 4

Many theorists and policymakers in predominantly capitalist nations have emphasized capitalism's ability to promote economic growth, as measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), capacity utilization or standard of living. This argument was central, for example, to Adam Smith's advocacy of letting a free market control production and price, and allocate resources. Many theorists have noted that this increase in global GDP over time conincides with the emergence of the modern world capitalist system.[22] While the measurements are not identical, proponents argue that increasing GDP (per capita) is empirically shown to bring about improved standards of living, such as better availability of food, housing, clothing, health care, reduction of working hours, and freedom from work for children and the elderly.[23] Proponents also believe that a capitalist economy offers far more opportunities for individuals to raise their income through new professions or business ventures than do other economic forms. To their thinking, this potential is much greater than in either traditional feudal or tribal societies or in socialist societies.

Answer 5

Drinking water is a public good, which should be provided by the government or at least regulated. You should draw distinctions between public goods, such as water, defense, and other things which might be best provided by government or under government supervision and other private type goods which are best provided by the market.

Answer 6

Maybe you should look at the cost structure of Halliburton for providing services to the govt. A no-bid contract with billions of dollars unaccounted for. Is this the "efficiency" of privatization everyone's talking about?

Answer 7

There are already measures in place that inhibit the formation of monopolies.
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 was enacted to prevent monopolies from forming.
I expect the biggest result of privatization would be the elimination of government waste, corruption, 'pork' projects,
bribery for contracts, etc.
Sounds like a good idea to me, where do I sign up?

Answer 8

ok then, in case you desire to privatise each thing then i'm hoping you know: All roads would be toll roads Emergency amenities would be paid for the two by using subscription or as you employ them the militia? No way, they are going to purely shield their business enterprise's pastimes Airports? i'm hoping youy're waiting for one airline to take over them & value you in direction of the roof criminal equipment? what criminal equipment? Frankly you're paving the way for China or Russia or the different wealthy usa to purchase controlling pastimes in united states of america Inc.

Answer 9

av8r - I think you are largely right. But I think that trer is asking what would it be like if government went back to preprogressive movement America. No antitrust, no income tax, etc.

Answer 10

Competition WOULD keep prices down. Look at all the SALES at the stores. You go where you get the best price. It would be GREAT if more things were private!