For profit industry will always be more expensive than public. Because the goal of the public industry is to provide the public with that good/service. It often sells at cost or even at a deficit since it does not need to profit. Its prices will only raise if material or labor costs increase.
Meanwhile private industries will always be looking for ways to increase price. Whether it be by cutting wages even further, adding pointless additions to up sell, “shrinkflation” etc. Because the goal is to make money despite the actual value of it’s good/service.
Because the goal of the public industry is to provide the public with that good/service. It often sells at cost or even at a deficit since it does not need to profit.
reminds me of how many western commentators disparage china's high speed rail system for running at a loss and supposedly wasting money. yes, of course it does. the trains are the point, not the pursuit of profit. the government pays for high speed rail because it's a needed service, and the costs of operating hsr is worth it in the long run and will even pay for itself.
Exactly. Money from train ticket sales is not the point of the public transport. The payoff lies in the population being able to travel the country cheaply. Yes the train will run a loss but the country as a whole will greatly benefit with the ease of transportation.
Capitalists only care about the sale. It is very short sided when trying to improve a nation as a whole. A private industry must constantly grow more and more to stay in business. This is detrimental in the long run as it will constantly require more and more degradation of the service and collusion with the state to maintain this profit growth. Overall, it will cost the population much more than the “losses” a public industry would.
Yes but have you ever thought about if it was a truly free market? We could have 20+ electric providers all with their own dedicated infrastructure and telephone poles competing with each other! That would make perfect sense and I am very smart dot libertarian
Funniest thing is that we can compare it somewhat to internet providers, and of course it works like predicted, local providers each had their own nets, the access was shitty, expensive and had barely any coverage, then the big companies like phone and tv providers came in and locals bankrupted instantly except the rare cases of those that got public support (from the local administration) and access to public infrastructure.
It's probably better to just let the 'market decide' and by that I mean use public infrastructure and tax money to prop up private enterprise and then give them monopoly power to determine monthly rates for broadband while insuring no competition by subsidy and zero antitrust enforcement
I mean, it's awesome right? Best. internet. Evar
it's important not to forget that the infrastructure was initially public but then just handed over to the telecoms. we could have just had public internet the entire time.
