Want this question answered?
Let's put it this way, the public sector is under WAY more scrutiny than the private sector is.
Private Sector banks are owned by individuals or a group of individuals who can take policy and business decisions quickly/easily when compared to public sector banks where policy decisions have to be approved by the government of India. Hence private sector bank are able to offer attractive plans and offers to customers and hence are growing at a faster pace than public sector banks.
private business is the business, where more than 50% shares are held by private persons or parties, and ownership remains in the hands of private persons. public business is the business where more than 50% shares are held by govt whether central or state, and ownership remains in the hands of govt. authourity
Private Sector banks are owned by individuals or a group of individuals who can take policy and business decisions quickly/easily when compared to public sector banks where policy decisions have to be approved by the government of India. Hence private sector bank are able to offer attractive plans and offers to customers and hence are growing at a faster pace than public sector banks.
While it may seem that the private sector is more efficient, the answer is actually ambiguous. Many studies in the 70s and 80s pointed to this efficiency in the private sector, but new studies (with the addition of new data from across the world) are showing there is actually little difference between the public sector and the private sector's abilities in reducing poverty.
Private sector banks are better than public sector banks in the following aspects:They are more customer friendly and customer oriented. If they don't get customers they go out of business (Unlike public sector banks that would stay in business anyway because they are owned and run by the government)They offer more facilities than public sector banks (Because of the same reason in point a)They offer better interest rates for depositsThey offer a wider variety of products.I am not saying that public sector banks don't do all these things, just that they don't do it as aggressively or effectively as private sector banks because their existence is not dependent on customers whereas for private banks they will be bankrupt if customers refuse to bank with them.
Ownership of the public sector of a certain country is shared equally by all citizens of that country. There should be certain laws that specify how does the PS get revenues and how does it spend them, how does it hire & fire employees, lowest and highest possible salaries ...etc. While ownership of any private sector entity is limited to the persons who paid up the capital to form it. Those persons may or may not be citizens of that country. Each private sector entity could invent its own rules of hiring & firing and payouts ...etc.
Because the private sector is entirely geared towards creating revenue at the cost of anything else. By contrast, revenue-gathering is not a concern for the public sector, while spending any money that would otherwise be revenue in useful ways is a major concern.
Generally the private sector is more efficient because efficiency means lower cost and more profit. The public sector doesn't have to worry about profit so there is no incentive to be efficient.
1.it is standard one 2.care about the public problems 3.forgery is not there 4.to improve the economic 5.equal employeement oppurtunity to public
Because normative analysis inherently deals with 'what should be'. Public sector activities are politically-motivated and chosen, so they reflect what the public believes 'what should be'.
It depends on the career. The private sector tends to pay more than public service but one usually has to build up a credible reputation and client-base.