티스토리 뷰

Privatization[각주:1] can increase efficiency[각주:2] and spur[각주:3] investment. It can also go wrong


Donald Trump ran for office[각주:4] promising to spur the private sector[각주:5] to rebuild[각주:6] America's roads, bridges and airports. But it seems that Republicans want to start their modernization[각주:7] in the sky[각주:8]. On June 21st House Republicans unveiled[각주:9] a bill[각주:10] that would privatize[각주:11] air-traffic control[각주:12], a policy the president announced earlier this month. If the administration is to be believed, this is just one of many privatizations that could increase efficiency and encourage infrastructure investment. Could such a national sell-off[각주:13] work? 


Unlike much of world, America has never seen a big push[각주:14] to privatize. That is partly[각주:15] because America did not see a wave of nationalizations[각주:16] after the second world war, as countries like Britain did. As a result, it has few public assets[각주:17], like airlines or telephone companies, that are obvious candidates to be sold. An exception is land[각주:18] owned by the federal government, which covers 28% of the country. Another is the Tennessee Valley Authority, a public electrical utility[각주:19] established as an economic development project after the Great Depression. (President Obama entertained[각주:20] privatizing the TVA[각주:21] during his second term, but did not get round to[각주:22] it.)


Yet America is hardly at the forefront of[각주:23] private infrastructure ownership[각주:24], either. Its airports, for example, are mostly publicly run, whereas in European cities such as London multiple privately owned airports compete[각주:25]. Though America's railway tracks are privately owned, its national passenger services[각주:26] are all run by one lumbering[각주:27] state-owned firm, Amtrak[각주:28]. And air-traffic control is choked of[각주:29] investment by the annual budget process[각주:30]. Countries like Canada have turned their systems over to[각주:31] self-funding[각주:32], non-profit bodies[각주:33], which are investing in technology. Tracking aircraft with[각주:34] satellites rather than radar may soon allow planes to fly closer together on some routes. America is already five-to-ten years behind[각주:35], says Bob Poole of the Reason Foundation, a free-market think-tank[각주:36].


Privatization works when firms can run assets or services more efficiently than the government can, or when competition between firms can bring down costs[각주:37] over time[각주:38]. Sometimes it is easier for private companies to set prices[각주:39] properly. For example, America's airports charge planes to land in proportion to[각주:40] their weight; were they privately owned, they would probably base[각주:41] price on runway congestion, which small planes are prone to[각주:42] cause.


Privatization can also provide a cosmetic[각주:43] accounting benefit[각주:44], by keeping costly infrastructure investment from[각주:45] pushing up[각주:46] deficits[각주:47]. This may lie behind[각주:48] the administration's wish to encourage "asset recycling", a term coined in[각주:49] Australia. The idea is to lease[각주:50] one piece of infrastructure, such as a toll road[각주:51], to investors, and spend the money raised on something new.


Cheerleaders for asset recycling envisage[각주:52] states leasing stretches of the sprawling[각주:53] interstate[각주:54] highway system[각주:55] to private tolling companies, raising vast sums for new investment. This has not happened much before, partly because a law from 1956 bans tolls on[각주:56] many interstate roads. But much of the system is now at the end of its intended lifespan[각주:57] and politicians are mostly unwilling to[각주:58] raise petrol taxes[각주:59] sufficiently to replace or upgrade it. So lifting[각주:60] the ban on[각주:61] tolls seems appealing[각주:62].


Whether asset recycling works depends on the details of any given deal[각주:63]. It has a mixed record. In 2006 Indiana sold a 75-year lease on a 157-mile (253km) toll road in the north of the state for $3.8bn. The funds were invested in other roads. The state built 413 miles of new highway and resurfaced[각주:64] another 4,000. The firm that bought the toll rights overpaid[각주:65] and went bankrupt[각주:66] in 2014. But other investors have since taken over[각주:67] the lease[각주:68], with no noticeable[각주:69] downsides for[각주:70] drivers, according to Aaron Renn of the Manhattan Institute, a think-tank. In fact, the public purse[각주:71] benefited from[각주:72] the overpayment[각주:73].


But it is equally easy for the taxpayer[각주:74] to end up on[각주:75] the bad side of a deal, and for an unwieldy[각주:76] monopoly[각주:77] to be created. In 2008 Chicago leased its parking meters[각주:78] to a consortium[각주:79] for 75 years for $1.2bn, a price that was almost $1bn too low, according to a report by the city's inspector-general[각주:80]. Big rises in parking charges caused a public backlash[각주:81], while the city lost the right to change parking policies without compensating investors[각주:82]. Worst of all, rather than being invested in new assets, the money raised was used to plug the city's short-term[각주:83] deficits


Avoiding the temptation to squander[각주:84] the proceeds[각주:85] is the first challenge for any privatization. It is also important to get the length of the lease right. Very long-term deals are likely to have to be renegotiated[각주:86], says Jose Gomez-Ibanez, of Harvard Kennedy School, because circumstances[각주:87] change. The public must also be won over[각주:88]. The ideal model for roads would be to impose[각주:89] tolls only once they have been repaired, says Mr Poole. 


It would be up to the states to get such details right. They own most of the relevant assets, like the interstate highways[각주:90] (though these are regulated in[각주:91] Washington). The federal government's role would be to help, or just to get out of the way. During his campaign, Mr Trump promised to[각주:92] provide $167bn in tax credits[각주:93] to the private sector[각주:94] to encourage investment. His administration also recently promised to allow more private infrastructure projects to issue tax-free[각주:95] debt, much as cities can while they are in charge.


The problem, though, is not a lack of willing[각주:96] investors, says Mr Poole. Infrastructure funds will jump at[각주:97] the chance to invest in American projects, as will pension funds[각주:98] seeking long-lived[각주:99] assets. The problem is a lack of opportunities. The logical place[각주:100] to start, then, would be to expand existing[각주:101] pilot programmes. In 1996 Congress set up such a scheme[각주:102] for privatizing airports. Only one, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, has so far taken advantage of it. Similarly small pilots exist for putting tolls on interstate highways. The White House has also said that it is considering encouraging states to privatize assets by paying them a bonus for doing so.


The privatization push may not succeed; it will certainly spark[각주:103] political opposition[각주:104]. (The air-traffic control proposal[각주:105] is said to have too little support to get out of committee in the Senate.) If it does go ahead[각주:106], America's infrastructure will probably benefit. But do not expect every deal to go well.


  1. privatization ; [명사] 민영화, 사영화, 사유화 [본문으로]
  2. efficiency ; 1. [U] 효율(성), 능률 [본문으로]
  3. spur ; (-rr-), [vn] 1. ~ sb/sth (on) (to sth/to do sth) 원동력[자극제]이 되다, 자극하다 [본문으로]
  4. run for office ; 공직에 출마하다 [본문으로]
  5. private sector ; [명사] (국가 경제의) 민간 부문 ;; 참고 the public sector [본문으로]
  6. rebuild ; (re・built , re・built / ˌriː'bIlt /), [vn] 1. (건물 등을) 다시 세우다[재건하다]; 다시 조립하다 [본문으로]
  7. modernization ; [U] 현대화, 근대화 [본문으로]
  8. in the sky ; 하늘에서, 천국에서. ;; 흐름상 "할 기미가 없다" 정도의 의미 [본문으로]
  9. unveil ; 2. (새로운 계획・상품 등을) 발표하다 [본문으로]
  10. bill ; 4. IN PARLIAMENT | (국회에 제출된) 법안 [본문으로]
  11. privatize ; [타동사][VN] (기업・산업 분야를) 민영화하다 [본문으로]
  12. air-traffic control ; [명사] 공항[항공 교통] 관제(管制) (약어 ATC). [본문으로]
  13. sell-off ; 1. (英) (정부에 의한 산업・서비스의) 매각 [본문으로]
  14. push ; 3. EFFORT | ~ for sth 분투 4. EFFORT | 격려, 독려 [본문으로]
  15. partly ; [부사] 부분적으로, 어느 정도 [본문으로]
  16. nationalization ; 2. 국유(화), 국영 ;; 사전에는 불가산으로 되어있으나 가산으로 활용한 것을 확인 [본문으로]
  17. public assets; 공적 자산, 공공 자산 [본문으로]
  18. land ; 3. AREA OF GROUND | [U] (격식 lands [pl.]) (매매가 가능한 소유물로서의) 땅[토지] ;; 참고 no-man’s-land [본문으로]
  19. utility ; (pl. -ies) 1. [C] (특히 美) (수도・전기・가스 같은) 공익사업 [본문으로]
  20. entertain ; 3. [타동사][VN] [진행형으로는 쓰이지 않음] (격식) (생각・희망・감정 등을) 품다 [본문으로]
  21. TVA ; 테네시 강 유역 개발 공사 (Tennessee Valley Authority) [본문으로]
  22. get round to ; ~을 할 시간[짬]을 내다 [본문으로]
  23. at [in.to] the forefront of ; (~의) 선두에(서)[로] [본문으로]
  24. ownership ; [U] 소유(권) [본문으로]
  25. compete ;1. ~ (with/against sb) (for sth) 경쟁하다 [본문으로]
  26. passenger service ; 여객 수송 [본문으로]
  27. lumbering ; [형용사] (육중한 덩치로) 느릿느릿 움직이는 [본문으로]
  28. Amtrak ; [명사] 전미(全美) 철도 여객 수송 공사 ;; US·UK [ǽmtræ̀k] [본문으로]
  29. choke ; 2. [타동사][VN] 목을 조르다 4. [타동사][VN] ~ sth (up) (with sth) (통로・공간 등을) 막다[채우다] [본문으로]
  30. budget process ; 예산 책정 절차 [본문으로]
  31. turn sth over to sth ; (용도·기능을) ~으로 전환[변경]하다 [본문으로]
  32. self-funding ; 자체, 자가 자금 지원, 조달 [본문으로]
  33. non-profit body ; 비영리 단체 [본문으로]
  34. track ; 2. FOLLOW | (특히 특수 전자 장비를 이용하여) 추적하다 [본문으로]
  35. be years behind ; 수년을 뒤쳐지다. [본문으로]
  36. think-tank ; [NOUN] A think-tank is a group of experts who are gathered together by an organization, especially by a government, in order to consider various problems and try and work out ways to solve them. [본문으로]
  37. bring (sth) down ; ~을 줄이다[낮추다] [본문으로]
  38. over time ; 시간이 흐르면, 지나면서 [본문으로]
  39. set a price ; 가격을 책정하다 [본문으로]
  40. in proportion to[with] ; …에 비례하여, ~와 균형을 이루어 ;; 반의어 out of proportion to[with] [본문으로]
  41. base ; [타동사] 1. …의 기초를 두다; 기초로 하다 ((on)) [본문으로]
  42. be prone to ; ~하기 쉽다, …을 잘 하는, …의 경향이 있는. [본문으로]
  43. cosmetic ; 1. 겉치레에 불과한, 허울뿐인 [본문으로]
  44. accounting benefit ; 회계상의 이익 [본문으로]
  45. keep sth from sth ; ~에 ~이 들어가지 않게 하다 [본문으로]
  46. push up ; 2. [가격]을 올리다; [수량]을 늘리다 [본문으로]
  47. deficit ;1. (경제) 적자 참고 surplus 2. 부족액; 결손 [본문으로]
  48. lie behind ; (진짜 이유가) ~ 뒤에 숨어 있다 [본문으로]
  49. coin ; [vn] 1. (새로운 낱말・어구를) 만들다 [본문으로]
  50. lease ; ~ sth (from sb) | ~ sth (out) (to sb) (특히 부동산・장비를) 임대[임차/대여]하다 [본문으로]
  51. toll road ; 유료 도로 [본문으로]
  52. envisage ; [동사] (美 주로 en・vis・ion) (미래의 일을) 예상[상상]하다 ;; US·UK [ɪn|vɪzɪdƷ] [본문으로]
  53. sprawling ; [형용사] (명사 앞에만 씀) 제멋대로 뻗어[퍼져] 나가는 [본문으로]
  54. interstate ; [형용사] (명사 앞에만 씀) (특히 미국에서) 주와 주 사이의, 주간의 [본문으로]
  55. highway ; 2. (英 격식) 공공 도로 [본문으로]
  56. toll ; 1. [C] 통행료 [본문으로]
  57. lifespan ; [명사] 수명 [본문으로]
  58. be unwilling to ; ~하는 것을 꺼리다, 마음 내키지 않다 [본문으로]
  59. petrol tax ; 휘발유세, 기름값에 붙는 세 [본문으로]
  60. lift ; 4. REMOVE LAW/RULE | [타동사][VN] (제재를) 풀다[해제/폐지하다] [본문으로]
  61. lift[remove] the ban on ; ~에 대한 금지를 없애다, 금지령을 해제하다, …을 해금(解禁)하다 [본문으로]
  62. appealing ; 1. 매력적인, 흥미로운 [본문으로]
  63. any given ~ ; 어느 때[곳, 것]도, 항시 [본문으로]
  64. resurface ; 2. [타동사][VN] (도로 등에) 표면 처리를 다시 하다 [본문으로]
  65. overpay ; [타동사][VN] (over・paid , over・paid / -'peId /) [주로 수동태로] 초과 지급하다; (일의 가치에 비해) 너무 많은 보수를 주다 [본문으로]
  66. go[turn, become] bankrupt ; 파산하다 [본문으로]
  67. take over sth (from sb) ; (~로부터) (~을) 인계받다 [본문으로]
  68. lease ; 임대차 계약 [본문으로]
  69. noticeable ; [형용사] ~ (in sb/sth) | ~ (that…) 뚜렷한, 현저한, 분명한 [본문으로]
  70. downside for ; ~에 대한 불리한 점, 단점 [본문으로]
  71. the public purse ; [the ~] 국고(國庫) [본문으로]
  72. benefit from ; ~로부터 이익을 얻다 [본문으로]
  73. overpayment ; [UC] 초과 지불(금) [본문으로]
  74. taxpayer ; [명사] 납세자, 과세 대상자. [본문으로]
  75. end up on ; end up with 과 비슷한 의미로 이해 [본문으로]
  76. unwieldy ; 1. (사물이) (크기・모양・무게 때문에) 다루기 불편한[거추장스러운] 2. (시스템・사람들 집단이) (너무 크거나 복잡해서) 통제[조직]하기 힘든 [본문으로]
  77. monopoly ; (pl. -ies) 1. ~ (in/of/on sth) (상업) (생산・시장의) 독점, 전매; 독점[전매] 상품[서비스] ;; 참고 duopoly [본문으로]
  78. meter ; 1. [특히 합성어에서] (전기・가스・수도 등의) 계량기 ;; US.UK [|mi:tə(r)] ;; 참고 light meter [본문으로]
  79. consortium ; (pl. con・sor・tiums 또는 con・sor・tia / -tiə /) 컨소시엄, (특정 사업 수행 목적의) 협력단 ;; US [kən|sɔ:rtiəm] UK [kən|sɔ:tiəm] [본문으로]
  80. inspector-general ; (법률) 감사관, (pl. inspectors g-) [군사] 감찰관[감] ((略 IG)); [미군] 장비 점검 사관(士官) [본문으로]
  81. public backlash ; 대중 비판, 대중의 반발 [본문으로]
  82. compensate ; 2. [타동사][VN] ~ sb (for sth) 보상금을 주다 [본문으로]
  83. short-term ; [형용사] (주로 명사 앞에 씀) 단기의, 단기적인 ;; 참고 long-term [본문으로]
  84. squander ; [타동사][VN] ~ sth (on sb/sth) 낭비[허비]하다 [본문으로]
  85. proceeds ; [pl.] ~ (of/from sth) (물건 판매・행사 등을 하여 받는) 돈[수익금] [본문으로]
  86. renegotiate ; [타동사, 자동사] 재교섭하다; <계약·조약 등을> 재조정하다 [본문으로]
  87. circumstances ; [명사] 사정, 상황 [본문으로]
  88. win over ; 설득하다, 자기편으로 끌어들이다, …의 지원이나 동정을 얻는 데 성공하다 [본문으로]
  89. impose ; 1. [타동사][VN] ~ sth (on/upon sth/sb) (새로운 법률・세금 등을) 도입[시행]하다 [본문으로]
  90. interstate highway ; [명사] 주간(州間) (간선) 고속 도로. ~ system 주간 (간선) 도로망. [본문으로]
  91. regulate ; 1. 규제[통제/단속]하다 [본문으로]
  92. promise to ; 선거 공약 관련한 표현으로 pledge to 를 쓰기도 하지만 promise to 도 쓰는 것을 확인 [본문으로]
  93. tax credit ; 세금 공제 [본문으로]
  94. private sector ; [명사] (국가 경제의) 민간 부문 ;; 참고 the public sector [본문으로]
  95. tax[duty]-free ; [형용사] 돈・상품 등이 면세가 되는 [본문으로]
  96. willing ; 2. [주로 명사 앞에 씀] 기꺼이 하는, 자발적인, 열렬한, 적극적인 [본문으로]
  97. jump at ; (기회·제의 등을) 덥석 붙잡다[받아들이다], …에 선뜻 달려들다, …을 덥석 잡다(=be eager for) ;; [VERB] to be glad to accept [본문으로]
  98. pension funds ; (증권·금융) 연금 기금(年金基金). [본문으로]
  99. long-lived ; [형용사] 장수하는[장수한]; 오래가는[오래 지속되는] [본문으로]
  100. logical ; 1. (행동・사건 등이) 타당한, 사리에 맞는, 적절한, 적합한 [본문으로]
  101. existing ; [형용사] (명사 앞에만 씀) 기존의, 현재 사용되는 [본문으로]
  102. scheme ; [~ (for doing sth) | ~ (to do sth)] 1. (英) (운영) 계획, 제도 ;; 참고 colour scheme, pension scheme [본문으로]
  103. spark ; 1. [타동사][VN] ~ sth (off) 촉발시키다, 유발하다 [본문으로]
  104. political opposition ; 3. Actions by one political group against another political group, either by using governmental power or by popular actions such as protests; generally, disagreement in politics. [본문으로]
  105. proposal ; 1. [C , U] ~ (for sth) | ~ (to do sth) | ~ (that…) 제안, 제의 [본문으로]
  106. go ahead ; 2. 일어나다[진행되다] ;; 참고 go-ahead [본문으로]
댓글
반응형
공지사항
최근에 올라온 글
최근에 달린 댓글
Total
Today
Yesterday
링크
TAG
more
«   2024/11   »
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
글 보관함