A government’s role is only to provide defense capability and urban infrastructure (road, water supplies…). All other services (education, health, social security) should be provided by private groups or individuals in the community. To what extent do you agree or disagree.

A government’s role is only to provide defense capability and urban infrastructure (road, water supplies…). All other services (education, health, social security) should be provided by private groups or individuals in the community. To what extent do you agree or disagree.

Many have started suggesting that the role of contemporary regimes should be confined to administering defence and other infrastructural facilities, while the rest such as education should be made the responsibility of the privately-run enterprise. Although this proposal seems feasible on many grounds, I feel executing this completely could prove to be a recipe for disaster.

Privately-owned undertakings focus on optimal utilization with no, or a minimal wastage, allowing efficient operations unlike state-supported initiatives. It is felt that this would help preserve invaluable resources majorly contributed by taxpayers, and also ease the burden of policy makers who would be able to focus on strategic sectors that do not make profits, but are critical for the smooth functioning of society and its security. For example, the USA follows this model, wherein its lawmakers detach themselves from this task and allow commercial enterprises to take the onus of educating and taking care of the health of citizens. This has resulted in efficient collaboration between the government and citizens.

However, despite promising efficiency, this arrangement could precipitate chaos. Undeniably, the primary objective of every business is earning profits, and thus, even though they might usher in innovation, as they have done in the domain of education and healthcare where they have introduced the state-of-the-art equipments and methods, the prices they charge for the services extended are exceedingly exorbitant, taking them out of the reach of a sizable percentage of middle income groups, and all of those who are marginalized, and cannot survive without subsidized interventions.

To recap, I cannot completely concur with these proposed settings, for it will create disparity in society, and widen the gap between the affluent and the impoverished. Thus if such a policy is adopted, lawmakers should keep certain sectors out of its ambit.