Government Intervention in Education and the Environment

Government Intervention in Education and the Environment Why do governments intervene? Illustrate your answer with reference to two of the following: health care, education, housing, the environment. Introduction The following paper will analyse the rationale behind government intervention in the areas of education and environment. Government intervention as the term signifies refers to the involvement of the government where it comes to the designing and implementing policies. Generally speaking government intervention takes the form of regulation. It might appear strange that in this competitive and privatised capitalist set up ‘government intervention’ is still a term which exists. Despite a negative tone attached to government intervention, it is imperative to have certain sectors regulated. This paper will evaluate government intervention in the areas of environment and education. At times government intervention is required to achieve economic efficiency. Economic efficiency is achieved when nobody can be made better off without someone else being made worse off. Such efficiency enhances prosperity by ensuring that resources are allocated and used in the most productive manner possible. One potential cause of inefficiency is where circumstances mean that the private returns which an individual or firm receives from carrying out a particular action differ from the returns to society as a whole. Market failureis a description of a situation where, for one reason or other, the market mechanism alone cannot achieve economic efficiency. Traditionally the goods and services provided by the public sector have been to make basic amenities available to the public. These have included health and medical services, education, law and order, transport. A recent estimate provided by Kable[1] suggested that a fifth of the public sector services could be delivered through outsourcing. Government Intervention in Education Government intervention in the education sector has been justified on various grounds. It has been argued that in the real world, there are many instances in which private markets fail to produce the socially optimal quantities of goods and services. Various forms of market failures can be identified when considering education, namely, Capital market imperfections: The private purchase of schooling, especially of higher education, is beyond the means of many poor families. Most credit markets do not provide an effective solution because of strong imperfections that reduce participation, particularly among very poor people. In principle, the budget constraints can be overcome by borrowing, given the high private returns to education. However, there are high risks for both borrowers and lenders in educational financing, and banks would not accept the promise of future earnings as collateral. Incomplete information: Market failure also relate to the problems of uncertainty and incomplete information. Households may not know the existence of services in education, or they may not be aware of the private returns to education, which have a long gestation period. As a result, they tend to under-invest in education. Externalities: Some of the benefits from education accrue not only to its direct recipients but also to society at large. Literacy, for example, lowers the transaction costs amongst individuals; womens education brings external benefits for fertility control and child health and nutrition. In deciding how much to purchase, individuals compare only the personal benefits and personal costs. Private provision, or full cost-recovery, would result in under-investment in education. Principle-agent: It is generally the case that in a household, parents are the relevant decision-making unit and not the child. For example, in education, the important issue is the perceived balance between the costs and benefits to the parents of sending their child to school. Since only some portion of the returns to schooling will accrue to parents, there may be rational (if regrettable) reasons for households to under-invest in schooling, notwithstanding its apparently high economic returns. According to a paper published by the World Bank, in the absence of market failures, there may also be a case for government intervention on grounds of equity and merit goods: Equity: Not all groups in society can afford the direct and indirect costs associated with investing in education. The government therefore plays a role in promoting equality of opportunity. If education was provided under market conditions, only those who could afford to pay would be able to enroll. Not only would there be under-investment from the social point of view, but income inequalities would be preserved from one generation to the next, since education is itself a determinant of lifetime income. Merit goods: Education is often considered a type of good with special merit that is not readily quantifiable and that might be under-supplied if left to the market. Basic education, for example, is an important channel through which governments advance nation building in addition to imparting basic literacy, numeracy and problem-solving skills. From the late 1960s central government began to take more interest in the policies being carried out at the local level. In education as well, there was growing central government interest in standards2 and the curriculum, 3 as the debate moved from equality and selection to the performance of schools. The 1970s brought reforms which set the pattern of change for the future. The Labour government considered the introduction of a needs-based central grant in the 1977 green paper on local government finance. The advocates of interventionism or government interference with the market protest that they do not want socialism, but rather to retain private ownership of the material factors of production, free enterprise, and market exchange. But they assert that these institutions of the market economy could be easily misused, and are often misused, by the propertied classes for an unfair exploitation of the poorer strata of the population. To prevent such an outcome they want to restrain the discretion of the individuals by governmental orders and prohibitions. The government should interfere with all those actions of the businessmen which it considers as detrimental to the public interest; in other respects, however, it should leave the market alone. Government Intervention is essential for education and environment. Consider the scenario where education was fully privatized, it would result in an increase in illiteracy. Education would become competitive and the objective of organizations would be to make money rather than impart education. This would mean that economically poor people in the society would have fewer prospects to gain education. For instance the recent Skills for Life initiative have been devised to improve the literacy and numeracy levels of the people. This has only been possible to implement because the government has taken action. Had the education sector been completely privatized it would have become another money-making mechanism which would not have benefited the society. However, arguments against total government control are that the private sector can help the public sector to provide the services with the use of modern technology. Government Intervention and the Environment Usually regulation is needed where the good is classed as a public good. Government regulation is an alternative method of seeking to protect and preserve the quality of the environment. Regulation however does not always lead to ideal outcomes, and it can be enormously expensive. Regulation is not always based on market systems, so it is subject to all the problems associated with lack of information and lack of incentives that have plagued the socialist nations. For instance, in the case of global warming, emissions from carbon dioxide from efficient burning of all fuels case no harm where they are emitted. No one’s rights are being violated by the invasion of harmful pollutant, yet these emissions are building up in the atmosphere. Thus this may require that in the future regulations must take this into account. Consider the scenario where the environmental resources are left in the hands of the private sector. Needless to say the resources would be depleted much faster. If there wasn’t government control in terms of dumping waste and pollution the industrialized societies would have led to a faster depletion of the ozone layer in the pursuit of making profits. There are undoubtedly major benefits for governments to intervene in certain areas, however, public-private sector partnership is required to reach optimum level of success. Some argue that governments must just serve as watchdogs and ensure that environmental policy is adhered to and that companies are made responsible for their actions. Taking responsibility towards protecting the environment would achieve a lot more than the government intervening all the time. It is a general belief that profit-seekers and corporations are too greedy and self-interested, the thinking goes, to give much thought to preserving wildlife, forests and wilderness. It can be argued that no one likes pollution, but getting rid of pollution requires resources. The more resources society devotes to lessening pollution, the fewer resources are available for all other goods and services. If someone else ws prepared topay to get rid of the pollution then undoubtedly one would experience an increase in utility at no cost to oneself. On the whole, rich countries are less polluted than poor countries, not more. The reason is that wealth increases both the demand for a healthier environment and the means to bring it about. Environmental regulation has been necessary to achieve this, to be sure, because pollution is indeed an externality. But it is not true that the problem has been left unattended in the rich world that things are therefore getting worse, and that CSR initiatives have to rise to the challenge of dealing with this neglect. Strong environmental protection is already in place in Europe and the United States. In some cases, no doubt, it needs to be strengthened further. In some other cases, most likely, it is already too strong. Overall, the evidence fails to show systematic neglect, or any tendency, once government regulation is taken into account, for economic growth to make things worse. Government regulation is an alternative method of seeking to protect and preserve the quality of the environment. Regulation however does not always lead to ideal outcomes, and it can be enormously expensive. Regulation is not always based o market systems, so it is subject to all the problems associated with lack of information and lack of incentives that have plagued the socialist nations. For instance, in the case of global warming, emissions from carbon dioxide from efficient burning of all fuels case no harm where they are emitted. No one’s rights are being violated by the invasion of harmful pollutant, yet these emissions are building up in the atmosphere. Thus this may require that in the future regulations must take this into account. As a general rule, however, correcting market failures is best left to government. Businesses cannot be trusted to get it right, partly because they lack the wherewithal to frame intelligent policy in these areas. The right policy on global warming is not clear-cut even at the global level, to say nothing of the national level or the level of the individual firm or consumer. Devising such a policy, and sharing the costs equitably, is a political challenge of the first order. Settling such questions exceeds both the competence and the proper remit of private enterprise. Conclusion From the preceding paragraphs it can be concluded that the government plays an important role when it comes to decisions relating to public goods like health, safety education and environment. It can be seen that if the public goods are left completely in the hands of private sector it would not yield beneficial results. Profit being the main motive private sector would not care enough for the rate at which natural resources were getting depleted or the quality of education. Moreover, not all sections of the society will be privy to the same quality of education. Thus government intervention is vital in ensuring that economic development occurs uniformly and consistently in the country. Thus government intervention is essential when considering key goods like education and environment Even though arguments presented have suggested that governments tend to be bigger polluters than private sector companies, however, government has a duty towards the society to provide good quality educ ation and a cleaner environment. Thus government intervention is important; however the level can vary depending on the development levels. Thus in summary government could play a role of watchdog more to achieve economic efficiency. BIBLIOGRAPHY Goodstein, E.S., Economics and Environment, (2004), John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Gwartney, James D., Stroup, Richard L., and Sobel, Russell S., Economics Private and Public Choice, (2000), Ninth Edition, The Dryden Press. Hammer, Jeffrey S. 1996. The Public Economics of Education. Public Economics Division, Policy Research Department, World Bank (mimeo). Hoxby, Caroline M. 1994b. Does Competition between Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 4979. James, Estelle. 1984. Benefits and Costs of Privatized Public Services: Lessons from the Dutch Education System. Comparative Education Review 28(4): 605-624. 1 Footnotes [1] Kable (organisation) provides technological research and analysis on the UK government and public sector.

Wilson Disease Essay example -- Health, Homeostatis

A patient presented with symptoms that suggested she might be schizophrenic. With many conditions mimicking schizophrenia, the doctor reviewed the notes from the family and noticed the patient had missed an eye doctor appointment. The physician, very aware an exam could confirm or refute a diagnosis, requested an eye examination be performed. Kayser-Fleischer rings were present in the cornea of her eyes. These rings are deposits of copper and sulfur granules and are greenish-gold in color. They are not always present; however, when they are, they are a classic identifier of Wilson disease. (Holtz, 2006, pp.108-109) Therefore, the eye exam confirmed a diagnosis of Wilson disease for this patient. While working in England during the early 1900’s, Alexander Kinnear Wilson, an American neurologist, described the disease. (Schilsky & Brewer, 2009) As with many things, because he was the one who originally described it, it is named after him. Wilson disease is also referred to as hepatolenticular degeneration. (Mayo Clinic, 2009). It is a genetic, chronic disease that stores up excess copper in the liver. Accumulation of excess copper begins at birth. (Children’s Hospital of Pittsburg, 2010) Copper is an essential trace metal vital to human health, requiring a small, regular intake to maintain homeostatis. According to Copperinfo (2011), â€Å"At least 20 enzymes contain copper and at least 10 of these require copper to function.† The brain, the skin, the heart and the immune system all need copper. Ingested copper is absorbed in the stomach and small intestine. From there, it enters the bloodstream, making its way to the liver. (Copperinfo, 2011) A healthy liver serves as a filter. Part of its functionality is metabolizing carbohydr... ...cinnati Children’s Hospital, 2009). A normal liver adequately filters and removes toxins from the body through the urine or bile. A lack of copper homeostatis in a diseased, damaged liver obstructs this process. This excess accumulation of copper in the liver is Wilson disease. Inherited mutated genes, one from each parent, cause the disease. If only one mutated gene is passed on, then the individual is just a carrier and will never be diagnosed with Wilson disease. It is prevalent worldwide, including several different ethnic groups. It most often affects children and teens from ages 10 to 20 years old. Occasionally there are exceptions and we see diagnoses of Wilson’s in children as young as three and adults over the age of 50. Treatment is available that, if continued for a lifetime, will maintain copper homeostatis and the patient will live a good life.

Control of the Corporation, Mergers and Acquisitions

The Agency Problem and Control of the Corporation, Mergers and Acquisitions The Agency Problem and Control of the Corporation Corporate managers are the agents of shareholders. This relation creates a problem for shareholders who must find ways to induce managers to pursue shareholders interests. Financial managers do act in the best interest of the shareholders by taking action to increase the stock value. However, in large corporations ownership can be spread over a huge number of stockholders. It has been mentioned that this agency problem arises whenever a manager owns less than 100 percent of the firm’s shares. Because the manager bears only a fraction of the cost when his behavior reduces the firm value, he is unlikely to act in the shareholders’ best interest. Let’s just say that management and stockholder interests might differ, imagine that the firm is considering a new investment, and the investment is expected to favorably impact the share value, but is relatively a risky venture. Owners of the firm will then wish to take the investment because the stock will rise, but management may not with the fear of there jobs being lost. One obvious mechanism that can work to reduce the agency problem is increased manager insider shareholding. But, even where managerial wealth permits this is costly since it precludes efficient risk bearing. Other mechanisms are also available. More concentrated shareholdings by outsiders can induce increased monitoring by these outsiders and so improve performance by a firm’s own managers. Similarly, greater outside representation on corporate boards can result in more effective monitoring of managers, and the market for managers also can improve managerial performance by causing managers to become concerned with their reputation among prospective employers. The available theory and evidence are consistent with the view that stockholders control the firm and that stockholder wealth maximization is the relevant goal of the corporation. The stockholders elect the board of directors, who, in turn, hire and fire management. Even so, there will undoubtedly be times when management goals are pursued at the expense of the stockholders, at least temporarily. Mergers and Acquisitions An acquisition, also known as a takeover or a buyout or â€Å"merger†, is the buying of one company (the ‘target’) by another. An acquisition may be friendly or hostile. In the former case, the companies cooperate in negotiations; in the latter case, the takeover target is unwilling to be bought or the target's board has no prior knowledge of the offer. Acquisition usually refers to a purchase of a smaller firm by a larger one. Sometimes, however, a smaller firm will acquire management control of a larger or longer established company and keep its name for the combined entity. This is known as a reverse takeover. Another type of acquisition is reverse merger a deal that enables a private company to get publicly listed in a short time period. A reverse merger occurs when a private company that has strong prospects and is eager to raise financing buys a publicly listed shell company, usually one with no business and limited assets. Achieving acquisition success has proven to be very difficult, while various studies have shown that 50% of acquisitions were unsuccessful. The acquisition process is very complex, with many dimensions influencing its outcome Although they are often uttered in the same breath and used as though they were synonymous, the terms merger and acquisition mean slightly different things. When one company takes over another and clearly establishes itself as the new owner, the purchase is called an acquisition. From a legal point of view, the target company ceases to exist, the buyer â€Å"swallows† the business and the buyer's stock continues to be traded. In the pure sense of the term, a merger happens when two firms agree to go forward as a single new company rather than remain separately owned and operated. This kind of action is more precisely referred to as a â€Å"merger of equals†. The firms are often of about the same size. Both companies' stocks are surrendered and new company stock is issued in its place. For example, in the 1999 merger of Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham, both firms ceased to exist when they merged, and a new company, GlaxoSmithKline, was created. †¢In practice, however, actual mergers of equals don't happen very often. Usually, one company will buy another and, as part of the deal's terms, simply allow the acquired firm to proclaim that the action is a merger of equals, even if it is technically an acquisition. Being bought out often carries negative connotations, therefore, by describing the deal euphemistically as a merger, deal makers and top managers try to make the takeover more palatable. An example of this would be the takeover of Chrysler by Daimler-Benz in 1999 which was widely referred to in the time, and is still now, as a merger of the two corporations. The buyer buys the shares, and therefore control, of the target company being purchased. Ownership control of the company in turn conveys effective control over the assets of the company, but since the company is acquired intact as a going concern, this form of transaction carries with it all of the liabilities accrued by that business over its past and all of the risks that company faces in its commercial environment. †¢The buyer buys the assets of the target company. The cash the target receives from the sell-off is paid back to its shareholders by dividend or through liquidation. This type of transaction leaves the target company as an empty shell, if the buyer buys out the entire assets. A buyer often structures the transaction as an asset purchase to â€Å"cherry-pick† the assets that it wants and leave out the assets and liabilities that it does not. This can be particularly important where foreseeable liabilities may include future, unquantified damage awards such as those that could arise from litigation over defective products, employee benefits or terminations, or environmental damage. A disadvantage of this structure is the tax that many jurisdictions, particularly outside the United States, impose on transfers of the individual assets, whereas stock transactions can frequently be structured as like-kind exchanges or other arrangements that are tax-free or tax-neutral, both to the buyer and to the seller's shareholders A purchase deal will also be called a merger when both CEOs agree that joining together is in the best interest of both of their companies. But when the deal is unfriendly that is, when the target company does not want to be purchased it is always regarded as an acquisition. Whether a purchase is considered a merger or an acquisition really depends on whether the purchase is friendly or hostile and how it is announced. In other words, the real difference lies in how the purchase is communicated to and received by the target company's board of directors, employees and shareholders. It is quite normal though for M deal communications to take place in a so called ‘confidentiality bubble' whereby information flows are restricted due to

foolear The Wise Fool in Shakespeares King Lear Essay

The Wise Fool in King Lear Whether or not the role of the Fool is an important one within King Lear is arguable. Although he seems to have great insight into much of the plays main events, he seems not to have any real influence on both the plot as well as the outcome of the play. He remains the sole character who does not have any direct link with the events of the plot, coupled with an unusually early exit; this raises the question of his significance. However at the very least he does certainly serve as entertainment not only for Lear but the audience as well, with his honesty, wittiness, and clever speeches that not only adds to the light humour but also to show us that the Fool could indeed be perceived as being†¦show more content†¦However, we can see that when the Fool becomes too close to the raw truth Lear will warn him that he will be whipped if he goes too far. When Lear first warns him with it, he replies: Truths a dog, that must to kennel: he must be whipped out, when the Lady Brach may stand by the fire and stink. Here the Fool warns Lear that his two daughters will have control over him due to his actions. Although Lear doesnt want to hear the truth and therefore tries to avoid it, the Fool essentially forces it out into the open through his speeches. He often uses comedic verses of saying to highlight the point he is trying to put across. In addition to this, he also provides various rhymes and riddles, taking on the role of a Chorus as a means of discussing the plays actions in a light-hearted yet clearly stating the essence of what is happening. For example, the following quotation sees the Fool referring to Lears actions concerning Cordelia: ...That man makes his toe What he his heart should make, Shall of a corn cry woe And turn his sleep to wake He refers to the way in which people may drive away those who they should love due to misplaced affection and that this will ultimately cause a person much grief and sleeplessness. This refers to the way he reacted when Cordelia failed to flatter him in his `love-test. This suggest the Fool to be quite wise to point this out, however it may be too