1.In each of the three scenarios presented in the case, opponents and proponents have divergent views of government regulations. One view is on the public benefit, the other is on the cost to private industry. How can you decide which view to accept?
The purpose of the inspection for the both container at port and people at the airport is to minimize the threat to the attack of terrorist on US soil. To decide of choosing between the public benefit and the cost to private industry in the three scenarios discussed in the case study, the factors that can be used to formulate the decision is the cost-benefit analysis in each of the scenarios. The foundation of the analysis for each of the scenario should be based on the benefits of the decision that is based on the utility arising form of human comfort, and the costs are measured by the reduction in the comfort of the humans by taking any decision.
In each of the scenarios earlier, identify the benefits versus the costs for both viewpoints.
In the case of the increase surveillance at the airport, the benefit arising from the increased surveillance is the security that the residents receive in form of decreasing the chances of terrorist cases. Although the costs that the airlines should afford in form of waiting time cut down the profits made by the firm and increase their costs per trip.
In the case of setting up new engines as per the guidelines of the EPA, the cost that the motor carrier companies have to bear is the cost of providing the consumers with enhanced engine motors at their own expenses and the increased costs of maintenance. The benefit that the people would derive from the increased expense will be a cleaner environment.
Similarly, in the case of increase in inspections of the cargos at the US ports the benefit that will arise is the prevention of terrorist cases in the states and scanning the cargo for explosives and other limited materials within the region increases the congestion at the ports that harms the profits of the businesses by adding up the time in each transaction.
Should the government intervene in setting regulations to increase security and help the environment? Or should private industry take on this role? Discuss.
There is a need for the governments to intervene in form of setting up the regulations that increase the security in the environment as the private industries are largely driven by the motives of making more profits than other. If the private industries would have a single opinion of not causing harm to the environments while they operate, it would have been easier to control the harm without regulations. However, this is not the case, and the firms if let unregulated would lead to degradation of the environment and harm the sustainability.
The main concern for the Federal government is the safety of every US citizen nothing more important than that so the little delay and cost will be bearable for the people and businessmen since there life at the stack and nothing more is important than human life to their nations.
The question is Who bears the costs and who reaps the benefits?