In the past four decades, the United States economic and governing systems have increasingly resorted to neoliberalism or the “free-market” approach to privatize and deregulate the economy. The economic philosophy of neoliberalism suggests that the American society should be shaped by the free market as it emphasizes individual freedom from government intervention (Harvey, 2005, p. 64). From the neoliberal perspective, privatization and deregulation of the economy are the perfect solutions to ensure that “freedom.” Privatization is the transfer of funds and management from public and governmental institutions to the private sector” (Gilroy & Moore, 2010, p. 1). Privatization and deregulation work hand in hand, as deregulation limit government intervention in the private sector. This paper will examine the meaning and implications of neoliberal privatization, explore the pros and cons of privatization, and discuss the effects of privatization in the human service …show more content…
In her article, The Perils of Privatization, Mimi Abramovitz (1998) identifies the following as the five perils or dangers of privatization: compromised care, uncontrolled costs and lower wages, erosion of middle-class entitlements, undercutting government, and obtaining private profits at public expenses (p. 29). Uncontrolled costs and lower wages, for instance, can contribute to labor exploitation within private organizations. The lack of regulation within the private sector allows privatizers to inflate the cost of services provided which primarily affects the workers as wages and benefits must be kept low to increase revenue (Abramovitz, 1998, p. 29). Another peril of privatization that must be discussed is the erosion of middle-class entitlements, such as Social Security and
Municipal control or an alternative delivery method? This is the question that has intrigued all levels of local government and created intense debates between taxpayers across municipalities. The services that municipalities provide are often vital to the existence of a local area. The issues of accountability, cost savings, quality of service and democracy often arise when choosing the best options to deliver services to a municipal area. In recent years the concepts of privatization, alternative service delivery and public-private partnerships are often promoted as ways cut down on overburdened annual city budgets and promote a higher quality of service to citizens. Municipalities have historically always provided basic services such as fire protection, water purification/treatment and recreational facilities. However, would private companies or another municipality be able to better deliver the same services more efficiently or at a lower cost? The city or town often provides a political grass roots approach to most local problems. Municipalities are better positioned and have a wider scope to provide services to their constituents in order to ensure quality of service that does not erode accountability and transparency, or drive the municipality deeper into debt.
Leading up to the year 1981, America had fallen into a period of “stagflation”, a portmanteau for ‘stagnant economy’ and ‘high inflation’. Characterized by high taxes, high unemployment, high interest rates, and low national spirit, America needed to look to something other than Keynesian economics to pull itself out of this low. During the election of 1980, Ronald Reagan’s campaign focused on a new stream of economic policy. His objective was to turn the economy into “a healthy, vigorous, growing economy [which would provide] equal opportunities for all Americans, with no barriers born of bigotry or discrimination.” Reagan’s policy, later known as ‘Reaganomics’, entailed a four-point plan which cut taxes, reduced government spending, created anti-inflationary policy, and deregulated certain products. Though ‘Reaganomics’ was successful both at controlling “stagflation” and promoting economic growth, it has and always will be an extremely controversial topic regarding the redistribution of wealth.
Neoliberalism is an economic approach that promotes a laissez-faire model of trade (Edmonds-Poli & Shirk, 253). This economic model, widely supported by many Western economists, is based on three main principles: stabilization, structural adjustment, and trade liberalization. (Edmonds-Poli & Shirk, 254) Neoliberalism is a method to restructure the economy and the first step is to stabilize the fiscal supply. This happens through decreased government spending, leading to an overall decrease in employment, public services, and access to credit, while simultaneously increasing interest rates and the cost of imports (Edmonds-Poli & Shirk, 254). The next element of neoliberalism is structural adjustment which focuses on the shift from the public to the private sector. This shift is meant to minimize government involvement, which in turn stimulates competition in an open market economy to create a more efficient private sector (Edmonds-Poli & Shirk, 254). Finally, trade liberalization works to increase foreign investment and exports by lowering trade restrictions, such as tarif...
Social security is a benefit program that was established in 1935 by Franklin Roosevelt. The program is a system in which workers pool a portion of their wages. These wages are paid to retired people on a monthly basis. The idea of the program is to protect each other and their families against wage loss when they retire. The ideas of social security benefits were intended to supplement pensions, and personal savings for retired people.
Recently, Canada’s health-care delivery system has undergone changes, affecting access to services. Although Canada’s public health-care system is universal, privatization of health-care services has increased in the past two decades (Ives et al., 2015, p. 150-151). Privatization is “a
Kelly A. Olsen, Social security privatization and Generation X, The Washington Quarterly 22:1 pp 189-204 Copyright 1999
In an article entitled “Resisting and reshaping destructive development: social movements and globalizing networks”, P. Routledge describes neoliberal development, “Contemporary economic development is guided by the economic principles of neoliberalism and popularly termed ‘globalization’. The fundamental principal of this doctrine is ‘economic liberty’ for the powerful, that is that an economy must be free from the social and political ‘impediments,’ ‘fetters’, and ‘restrictions’ placed upon it by states trying to regulate in the name of the public interest. These ‘impediments’ - which include national economic regulations, social programs, and class compromises (i.e. national bargaining agreements between employers and trade unions, assuming these are allowed) - are considered barriers to the free flow of trade and capital, and the freedom of transnational corporations to exploit labor and the environment in their best interests. Hence, the doctrine argues that national economies should be deregulated (e.g. through the privatization of state enterprises) in order to promote the allocation of resources by “the market” which, in practice, means by the most powerful.” (Routledge)
...ploded among white, middle-class, religious families who want more control over the values their children are exposed to or who fear for their children's safety, Reich said. "I'm convinced that further privatization is inevitable," he added. Supporters have framed the argument for it as "a civil rights issue or a matter of social justice." he said. "People say President Clinton sent his daughter to private school. If we are serious about social justice, we should give all parents the same choice that wealthy parents have."
This essay will discuss the extent to which the New Deal strengthened the USA’s capitalism. The New Deal introduced reforms to the capitalist system and they got rid of the fetchers that were abused in the 1920’s. The New Deal reformed the system to protect workers from abuse from the owners of the factories and how the US government took more responsibility for the welfare of its citizens.
Peratta, Ed. ?Despite bumps in the road, privatization races on.? American and City and County Oct 1995: 50.
In Taft, California, with a perimeter of razor wire, armed prison guards, supervise hundreds of medium security level federal inmates. Welcome to one of America's newest and fastest growing trends in the area of corrections. This new phenomenon is termed, The Corporation of Modern Corrections. Faced with an increase in prison overcrowding and aging institutions, court orders demanding immediate reform coupled with a straining budget, mandatory minimum sentences, and the public's attitude toward "getting tough on crime", America's justice system is in need of an overhaul. Thus, government leaders are ready to consider different options to help reduce the strain, while still meeting is legal responsibility to provide services. The option to emerge to the forefront is Prison Privatization - " the transfer of asset's and of production of public goods and services from government to the private sector."1 in other words, private interest is being given the opportunity to help alleviate the strain of taking care of a growing population more economically and efficiently than the government.
2008, p. 144); in other words, the privatisation is a policy run and controlled by the government, this privatisation movement was based on human rights, control of prices and the regulations of the health services and social care in order to promote better outcomes and better standards of care.
The United States faced the worst economic downfall in history during the Great Depression. A domino effect devastated every aspect of the economy, unemployment rate was at an all time high, banks were declaring bankruptcy and the frustration of the general public led to the highest suicide rates America has ever encountered. In the 1930’s Franklin D Roosevelt introduced the New Deal reforms, which aimed to “reconcile democracy, individual liberty and economic planning” (Liberty 863). The New Deal reforms were effective in the short term but faced criticism as it transformed the role of government and shaped the lives of American citizens.
Merger activity is greater during economic expansions than during contractions, and mergers are more likely in bull markets – markets in which share prices are rising and lots of buying is going on. However, unless we believe that companies purchase other companies just because they are in a position to do so, this alone cannot explain the phenomenon.
Capitalism is an economic system in which the production and distribution are privately owned, the government involvement is minimal,and there is free enterprise. In Capitalism, the means of production are privately owned and operated for profit in a competitive market. Also the economic investment, ownership and profits are all owned by individuals. Under capitalism the state is separated from the economy, which means that the government has no role in business. In other words, everyone works for themselves. The market forces in a capitalist country runs by supply and demand which it determines the price and later on it turns into profits. Supply is the quantity of goods and services a business is willing to sell, while Demand is the quantity of goods and services consumers are willing to buy. Therefore, Capitalism is the best economic system because it rewards the ones that work hard and since the government does not control trade, there is a large variety of goods and creates options for consumers to fit their personal needs.