The Angry Economist enjoys applying the iron fist of economic sense to a plethora of issues, with the chief aim of undermining the "leftist strategies [that] are the cause of our current problems".
However, his expositions of contemporary conservatism are extremely well argued and typify the seemingly dispassionate rationalism of the right that leaves lefties red-faced and fuming. Our thanks therefore goes to Mr Nelson for inspiring this blog, whether or not he will regret it remains to be seen.
To kick things off, a recent post gives a compact argument about how private sector is better than public at the efficient management of resources. This adage has been around since the beginning of economics itself; most famously expounded by Nobel laureate Milton Friedman in his calls to 'starve the government'.
However, he has touched only tangentally on the truth. Let us assume that a private sector employee, with hopes of career advancement and rising salary, is good at making profit for his company. Public sector employees are not so good at making profit. Their career advancement, we hope, is through competency in his chosen office. Any differential in competency we can put down to lower wages and fewer opportunities for promotion in the civil service (although the latter is changing).
However, let us underline that the private sector is there to make profit. All other aims are subsumed to this one ambition. As a result markets created through privatisation (wholly/fully) will have a structure to further this end. This will maintain no matter how many government regulations/targets/inspections are carried out. For services such as education and helathcare this is an extremely worrying prospect. The only antidote to such a situation is so much government monitoring so as to make efficiency gains questionable.
The capital-mobilising deal maker
13 hours ago