• @Kecessa
    link
    22
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Not only does the government needs money, services centralized in the hands of the government end up costing less because they have a monopoly and they don’t run them for a profit! Over here road insurance is private only for the vehicle, our insurance as today users (you know, the stuff that costs a fortune to insure because breaking both legs costs more to the system than whatever car you’re driving) costs peanuts in comparison to places where it’s the private sector that controls it (if I lived across the border from where I am my registration + insurance cost would be double what it is now).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        511 months ago

        England privatised its rail system

        I have a dear friend from Docklands in London, who ran trains. We argue constantly about privatisation vs a government-run consolidated service like healthcare. He’s adamant that a mass transit system has to be run as a separate capitalist company, that it must be cash-positive, and that’s the only way to do it.

        He also believes the Tube is overpriced, cramped, sweaty, and a really low value for money that is propped up by people who can’t afford to drive into London nor park once they arrive, and have no other choice.

    • @SneakyThunder
      link
      -411 months ago

      services centralized in the hands of the government end up costing less because they have a monopoly

      Where I live privately owned utility companies provide much cheaper services than govt. Also govt is very bad at providing them consistently (if people outside of big city lose electricity for example, they have to go and block nearest highway, otherwise govt just ignores their complaints)

      I guess monopoly might be beneficial for some period of time but ultimately it’s bad, both in private and public sector.