In this case, it is. Private industry can also exist in an oligopoly. Insuring that costs vs performance don’t factor. Take the telecoms industry. Separate companies that should be competing but instead have by and large just carved up the US and they don’t have to do better. The vested interest you were talking about is competition. When there’s little or no competition, the vested interest is profit without the need to entice customers.
Take Facebook. In Europe they have what’s called the GDRP. It basically rules of conduct for companies to give more control to consumers in regard to their privacy. Facebook has a monopoly on what it is, so it able to get around the GDRP by forcing its users to agree to any and all terms and conditions. They are still abiding by the rule of the law, but they are able to force the customer to agree to give up thief privacy because they have no other choice. Facebook is where everyone they know is. There’s no vested interest to be better for the consumer. It’s agree, or you don’t get to share pictures of cats.
And that’s the main point. When you have your customer over a barrel, they aren’t going to do better. They’re going to do what companies do and that’s to make money. No competition, no reason to make the product better to make more money.
the vested interest argument only works when there’s competition. The health care system, doesn’t have that. If it did, the US wouldn’t be paying three times as much on average for treatments than anywhere else in the world. On top of that, you have vultures coming in and snapping up the patents on old generic drugs that cost nothing, and then hiking the prices by one thousand percent. As I said to some one else, an old anti parasite drug used mostly for toxoplasmosis in babies born from mothers who have hiv went from 13 bucks to 750, while in the UK that same drug costs 66 cents. So I guess my question is in what way is the private sector doing better than the government here?