Without private industry/capitalism would personal computers exist?
Most probably not. The earliest computers probably depended heavily on the government as a buyer, but it took inventors and entrepreneurs to develop them. They were huge and many large companies couldn't have afforded them. The idea of creating low-cost computers that the public could afford came as the technology was refined. Private industry and capitalism were essential factors in creating the modern computer with all its derivations.
What is the difference between a public and a private hospital?
A public hospital, on the other hand, is completely and entirely run by the government’s funding and money. Everything from the construction to the fees of the doctors to the equipment, medicines are based on the government budget. Hence, each and every single thing is being taken care of by the local government body. A public hospital is considered to be a preferable option for the not-so-rich lot of people who, despite acute illness, cannot afford the heavy fees of a private hospital. It is very ironical to see that a hospital that is governed by the government, which has obviously more funds than a group of people or one person alone, does not offer that level of service that can be counted on in most of the times. However, this can be due to the fact that a government has a limited budget allocation to health care as it has many things in its hands such as defense, education, economy, etc.Government General Hospital, ChennaiWhat is the difference between Private Hospitals and Public Hospitals?• The prime difference between a private hospital and a public hospital is the ownership. A private hospital is one which is owned and governed by a person or many people who are managing the whole finances on their own. A public hospital, on the other hand, is completely and entirely run on the government’s funding and money.• The fees of a private hospital are higher than that of a public hospital. It should be noted that most of the time public hospitals offer their services free of charge or for reduced rates.• In a public hospital, since the services are mostly free, waiting time is longer. For some operations patients have to wait for years until they get their place. In a private hospital, waiting time is less. If you have money, you can get you operation done very quickly.• Private hospitals have the most modern equipment and the equipment last longer too. Public hospitals have good equipment, but due to the extreme use they can get damaged more often than those in a private hospital.• Number of patients per doctor is higher in public hospitals. It is not good as the attention is too much divided. It is also exhausting for the doctor.• Since private hospitals are a kind of a business they earn a profit like any other business. However, that is not the case with a public hospital. Governments operate public hospitals for the health of their people, and not to earn a profit
What are some positive and negative examples of parts of the U.S. government that have been privatized?
Locally, the city operated a sewage treatment plant and landfill.The sewage treatment plant used large settling ponds that were treated with chlorine. The solids were removed to the local landfill. The liquids were treated until they reached an acceptable purification, then released into the river.Unfortunately, the treatment plant was upwind of the city.The city struggled with odor for years but could not get it right. The complaints down wind became so loud, the city contracted the operation of the sewage treatment plant with a stipulation for odor control. A private company has operated the plant ever since with only mild complaints during the overflows during storms.The citizens took charge in this case. They demanded the City control the odor. The city realized it could not do the job and did the only honorable thing by subcontracting operations.
What are some reasons on why Anarcho-Capitalism doesn't work?
Basically the An-cap argument is that logically there is no need, role, or reason for the state to exist within capitalism. In theory and practice this means not just open competition between capitalists in the market but also open competition between capital and labour, plus open competition between labour and labour. And presumably let the devil take the hindmost!It’s a logical fallacy and here’s why.The idea for a non-state capitalist society originated with Herbert Spencer who was a noted Social Darwinist who in his theories on the “survival of the fittest” considered the role of medical institutions in particular had in maintaining and extending human life and applied this philosophical concept to economic life in ‘Man Versus The State’ 1884.The state is a feature of all class societies and is effectively the machinery of government - or if you prefer the executive - for the ruling class. The emergence of the nation state corresponds with the social development of capitalism where it was found necessary to regulate production, competition and trade so that the growth of monopolies were restrained through anti-trust laws and other legislation. In practice this means whoever controls the state has the political power to regulate the balance of rivalry between the different sectional interests of the capitalist class.This is the current status quo and there’s no signs of it changing whilst capitalism lasts. For its through their common experience both the nation state and a majority of the capitalist class have reached an agreement that such a settlement is in their collective interests for legitimising the private ownership of property by the provision of a coercive machine (police, judiciary, armed forces, schools, etc.) for conserving the monopoly by the capitalist class of the wealth taken from the workers in a geographical area.And its specifically on this point that the theory of the an-caps fails. For without the institution of the nation state there’s no legitimacy on all transactions worthy of consideration.That’s how the opposing forces line up, now imagine what would be the end game if the An-cap theory was put into practice? Well to put it harshly society would be monopolised by giant corporations who would determine the price of everything. Even body parts!
What needs to be done to make agriculture profitable for more farmers in India?
There are number of measures that can be applied which would not only be profitable to farmers but also boost India's growth in agricultural sector.Most important amongst them are:1- Genetic Engineered(GE) Farming.Indian population will keep on increasing till 2040. To sustain huge amount of population we need efficient technology which will increase the productivity of farm land.2- Technology penetrationApart from GE, new technologies should be adopted for crop assessment, pest detection, soil health, what to grow according to the climate etc.3- Connecting the farmers to the markets.Indian markets are heavily distorted. Farmers need to be connected to the markets through proper supply chain.This will increase farmers income as well as lower the inflation in agri products.4- Contract Farming.Under this , the land belongs to farmer except that choice of crop is under a contract.Though done in few areas, it needs a boost.5- Corporate FarmingPrivate player's participation can do wonders. It's a myth that this step would lead to greater marginalisation and exploitation of small and marginal farmers.6- Remove disguised employment.Disguised employment - More people working on same land against number of required people. This decreases productivity as well as more distribution of less income amongst the working farmers.