You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
shmuklipoopoo on scored.co
1 year ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)2 children
That sounds all nice and libertarian until you realise that running a house costs money to the city. You need to maintain roads, waste removal, water pipes, an electrical grid, emergency response, schools etc. Without that it would all be charged separately by for-profit companies. Whether it can be run cheaper for the end-user by a private or public organisation may be up for debate, but the cost will still always be there.
Again it's a big depends. With big infrastructure projects like these you aren't going to have company A and B both lay water pipes along the same road, or even have two roads running in parallel right next to each other just for the sake of competition. What eventually happens is that each company claims its own 'turf' in which it runs a local monopoly, which is the worst of both worlds.
Privatisation is almost always an outright failure or at least a massive L for everyone who uses that service. I didn't realiae how pro libertarian this post comes off as till now.
The suburban train network in my city is government operated and runs at a net loss however the freight rail operator in my state used to also be government run and that covered the costs of passenger rail in spades.
Yea.. and then I would have a choice.. and there would be competition.. which would drive prices down and innovation up. You see this as a problem?
The suburban train network in my city is government operated and runs at a net loss however the freight rail operator in my state used to also be government run and that covered the costs of passenger rail in spades.