<Water is so basic, you can't subject it to the free market.

In real life, the more important a product is, the more important it is to make sure it is subject to the free market. Everything I buy that is reliable and reasonably-priced is privately manufactured, important or not. Why a corrupt and ineffective government utility like Ghana's is considered superior to a private one is more than I can figure out. The one they've got isn't doing the job. What makes them think a new public utility would? And if customers don't pay for the infrastructure, who will?

Food is basic too. So is shelter. So is medicine. So are a lot of other things. Maybe the government should provide all of these? This particular solution--socialism--has not worked ANYWHERE it has been tried.

Regardless of its merits or flaws, the agreement has yet to be signed, a year after it was expected. A deal is now slated by the end of this year, but the controversy has already led to a decision to cut the lease to 15 years from 25 years. The leading contender for the contract, which is believed to be worth $1.4-billion, is thought to be Suez Lyonnaise Des Eaux, a French firm that runs water systems in 120 countries.

An exclusive government contract with a private company to provide a service, excluding all competitors, may be a lot of things, but capitalism ain't one of them.

The first question you have to ask when you are wondering why capitalism isn't doing the job, is: what would happen if I decided to build a purification plant on my own in Ghana and start selling water in competition to the French outfit?

If the answer is, you build the plant and start making money, it's probably capitalism.

If the answer is, the government shuts you down, or requires a hugely expensive license, or ties you up in the courts, or just sends the boys around to bust up your joint, it isn't capitalism. It's the same old Third World thugocracy.

What's the answer to this question in Ghana?

For families like the Owusus, the result is to pay as much as 10 times more for their water than the wealthy do, as they turn to local water sellers and trucks run by private "dealers" that visit the slum every day.



...In fighting the proposed leasing deal, the coalition's primary concern is that a private company will have no motivation to build new infrastructure in the places where it is most badly needed, especially in slums such as Nima and rural areas that currently have no access because the poor are not seen as significant consumers. There is much more money to be made delivering water to high-income areas with swimming pools and lush lawns.



Okay, from a free-market standpoint, what is wrong with this picture?

If you are wondering why the poor pay ten times what the rich do for water, yet are not considered profitable consumers for potential water companies, well, so am I.

Of course, the real problem is that for years Ghana, like many other Third World countries, has not been a free nation, either economically or politically. Most of the wealthy got that way not by enterprise, but by corruption in an economy with even more mutual backscratching between government and the "private" sector than ours has. It isn't easy getting any private solutions to work in such an environment, until the basic act is cleaned up.