The Pros And Cons Of Public Services

In private practices, it may be ok to charge for faster services, but in large corporations and public services this is due to the lack of resources. In an ideal world, the privilege of cutting in line would be reserved for people in a hurry, parents juggling a handful of children, and people with disabilities. Money seams to make things unfair. If a person has a higher income they are better able to afford certain luxuries and if a person has little money they are considered part of the masses. Having money seams to make a person think they are better than other people. People are in general equal save for people in great positions such as the president. Individuals have a way of using money to define themselves, and therefore using money

A public service is a service that is funded by the government or by donations to help the government deliver its actions as effectively as possible. There are two types of public services they are statutory and non-statutory services. The difference between a statutory and a non-statutory service is that a statutory service is paid by tax payers, funded by the government and is set up by the law. They are usually uniformed and highly professional an example would be the Emergency Services and the Armed Forces. A non-statutory service is a service that doesn’t receive a lot of government funding so they are paid by members or the public as they are registered as charities, they are set up by individuals and not parliament and unlike

As the seasons change from leaves falling to cold temperatures the government is staying the same. The people of America are changing constantly and in order to keep America running smoothly government should change too. I believe that the most pressing problem of today's government is the federal debt. That is why I am proposing a new amendment to limit the government's spending and decrease the federal debt.

I think that some federal government offices should be privatized because there are no competitors. So, their services and attitudes tend to become worse. For example, DMV is a really good example. When I searched on the Internet to find some reviews about DMV, I could find lots of reviews of complaints. A writer says that “Today, uneducated lady informed me that my early renewal of DL will require retaking written test – later on that day it occurred that it is not true, however they could not process my paper work – due to be late. I do not even want to mention that I had an appointment. I am pretty sure 3rd world country embassies work better.” from February 2017.” Even though Japanese DMV is not privatized and we have to wait a long time,

One of the many arguments is that most, if not all public sector service(s) service is monopolistic. Often time, there is one source of supply for a government service. For example, residents of a city have one fire department, one police department, and one system of public education. Even though each of those entities, many of them have different branches, they are all fall under

In this analysis we will review a case titled “The Dilemma at the Public Service Department.” We will be discussing different issues, amongst them are: opinions on the honesty, malfeasance, misfeasance, nonfeasance, accountability, competence, and why these particular responsibilities are identified. We will also discuss certain trade-offs made by the commissioner’s loyalty to the department as well as the governor, and public interest. We will also be discussing three barriers when it comes to deciding how the governor will be approached, along with the basic elements that are recommended in strategic management planning.

The future is uncertain, as such conventional wisdom dictates that governments must intervene in the economy to help enhance growth and ensure stability. However, is too much intervention a bad thing? There are many reasons why it is so but one such reason is that in an economy where there is excessive government intervention and ownership such as in the Soviet Union, there was a lack of risk and subsequently lack of innovation as rather than satisfying customers the concern of a producer in the system was to satisfy the state. The lack of a reward for working harder, due to all businesses being owned by the state reduces incentive to produce or innovate and this leads to inefficient outcomes in an economy. This is a contrast to a capitalist society where innovation and hard work can lead to personnel gain in the form of money. Price ceiling and price floors are price control mechanisms that are used to, respectively set a maximum price, and a minimum price. One such problem as a result of implementing these is that they will artificially cause a shortage or surplus, respectively, of the good or service due to affecting supply and demand. This prevents the good/services to be at the equilibrium price, which is where economic outcomes would be most efficient. So should governments intervene? Regardless of the aforementioned downsides this has always been a topic of debate between Keynesian economists and classical economists, but a widely accepted consensus is that some level

One current environment-development problem that could be framed as a Common Pool Resource dilemma is that of public health. Public health might not seem to meet the criteria of a common pool resource and thusly not be a problem, but in reality it is. While it’s true that anyone can be healthy, and one person being healthy doesn’t take away from the health of others, the point of contention in this case revolves around illness and its spread. This arises in the form of drug-resistant infections. In an ideal world, infections are treated properly and only the correct medications are used. However, in the real world, illnesses are improperly treated resulting in the creation of drug-resistant infections. The subsequent spread of these infections

Pros and Cons of Different Perspectives of Public Health Both biomedical model and socio-environmental model have pros and cons. The biomedical model uses the objective and neutral knowledge obtained from observation of a disease itself and symptoms, and it has contributed to the eradication of smallpox.4, 12 However, this approach disregards socio-environmental factors, and its cost-effectiveness and patient participation are in question according to Atkinson.4 The socio-environmental model tackles the root causes of a disease rather than a quick fix. Nevertheless, this model does not recognize medical contributions, and individuals are over-socialized by ignoring how their will and actions influence health.4, 5 According to Gabbay,

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Youness Elhamidi, Department of Public Administration, American Public University System, 111 W. Congress Street, Charles Town, WV 25414. E-mail: yelhamidi@apus.edu.

Beginning in the 1980s, many jurisdictions started to seek third-party alternatives to provide public service under the pressure for cost savings and the call for government efficiency. Private organizations are known for their expertise in specific fields – if leverage private sector know-how well, it can bring success to public sector – high quality public services can be delivered with lower costs. Therefore, public organizations can concentrate on solving critical tasks when they contract out the mundane work to private sector. Outsourcing waste management is one of the effective privatization solutions for public organizations given its easy-to-measure nature, and it continues to be popular among local governments. Nevertheless, the success of privatizing government services is not guaranteed. If not manage privatization well, it could result in increased costs, organization structure and culture change or legal liabilities. In addition, take advantage of privatizing public services redefines the nature of government service and governance as it creates a partnership between private and public sector. With the rapid pace of technology development and the obligation of government to spend taxpayer’s money strategically, privatizing government services has gained unstoppable momentum.

SHOULD CURRENT PRIVATIZATION PRACTICES BEING FURTHER IMPLEMENTED AS ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT POLICIES IN CATERING PUBLIC NEEDS AND IN ENSURING SERVICES QUALITY?

At the same time there has been an increased loss of public confidence in institutions of government especially in providing public goods and services. A combination of these factor as well as others have been the driving forces towards the issue of privatization.

The study is an attempt to view Public Private Partnership model from a new dimension of “Privatization”. The features of Public Private Partnership differ from project to project. However, the basic concept of Public Private Partnership signifies private involvement in providing public services which is the fundamental principle of “Privatization” as well. The difference between the two lies in the degree of private involvement in the project. Therefore the usage of the two terms can be viewed as a language game. The paper tries to bring out the similarities and differences between the two terms by concentrating on the Mangalore city Corporation case of Privatization of water and PPP in installation and maintenance of street lights.

On the other hand I was familiar with the arguments of the proponents of privatization, who argue that private companies are better positioned than the government to provide most services in an efficient manner. In the face of this debate I wanted to explore the evidence in an attempt to reach some fact-based conclusions about the impact of the privatization of infrastructure service on their delivery.