Showing posts with label free markets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free markets. Show all posts

Friday, 1 October 2010

Lansley Goes to War

And jolly good, say I. The BMA, as the trade union of doctors has a quite typical response to a bit of competition:-
Dr Meldrum said: ‘The BMA has given very careful consideration to these wide-ranging proposals, and we hope the government will demonstrate that it really does want doctors to be in the driving seat by listening to what doctors are telling them. 
‘Doctors want to build on the principles of the NHS, and to maintain and improve services despite the hugely challenging financial climate. 
‘However, success depends on working in partnership with others, a holistic approach to care and a reduction in bureaucracy. The insistence on a market-based approach risks fragmentation, inefficiency and increased transaction costs.’
The problem is that there isn't a scrap of evidence anywhere in the world that says that more competition causes inefficiency, and I challenge the BMA to produce some. Introducing competition into the opticians market in the 80s is what gave us cheaper spectacles from Specsavers. Competition for airlines gave us cheaper fares. More recently, the arrival of Firefox on the browser arena is what gave us better, faster, safer internet browsers. Microsoft had disbanded the Internet Explorer team because they didn't need to make it any better.
As I like to tell people here, I would have fired a couple of people who dealt with a health problem of mine, if I had a choice, and I like the idea that they wouldn't get the gravy but that someone else would instead.

And yes, it works inside organisations too. Tom Peters in In Search of Excellence talked about how certain companies had sales teams competing for the same turf, and they all worked harder as a result and achieved better sales, despite the fact that it looks wasteful to the sort of bureaucrats that run most large companies.

Tuesday, 14 September 2010

Wonderful! Wonderful!

From The Guardian
Cuba has announced it will lay off more than a million state employees in a sweeping privatisation drive that will transform the island's socialist economy.

Authorities said layoffs would begin immediately amid loosened controls on private enterprise which, it is hoped, will kickstart the private sector and create new jobs for former public workers.

The official Cuban labour federation, which made the announcement on Monday, said 500,000 jobs would go by March and eventually 1m would be cut in the biggest economic shakeup since the 1960s.
I've looked up Cuba's economy on Wikipedia. As of 2009, it had a labour force of 5.1m, with 78% of the workforce in the public sector. Or about 4 million public sector workers. So, Cuba is going to reduce its public sector workforce by 25%, which will take it to about 58% public sector.

So, the Cuban people are going to get richer. Which is a massive plus.

Now, assuming that the US doesn't change its embargo, are those who blamed Cuba's ills on the US going to admit their error when the Cuban people get richer?