171
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] markr@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Yes it is. Luckily we have a system of taxation. By ‘free’ I mean of course ‘at the point of use’. We could provide 100% subsidies for mass transportation for probably around 100 years before we would approach equity with the subsidies we have given to fossil fuels and private transportation.

[-] user75736572@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

The reason people don't use public transport is because right now it absolutely sucks in most places if you want more people to use them then they need to be privatised so a business that actually has an insentive to provide a good service can take over and make them great ( for example look at Japan). This way you can also lower taxes a bit which is great for the economy

[-] markr@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh I agree. Use cost is one major problem, quality and non-existence is the other. However privatization is neoliberal bullshit. It doesn’t guarantee quality. It guarantees that profits will be extracted and therefore use cost will increase and/or quality will decrease.

[-] user75736572@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

Companies actually have to make their customers happy, if there is adequate competition it will definitely work out, if you look at almost any industry (that isn't overegulated) the customers are satisfied, companies have real insentives governments don't.

[-] markr@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There is no competition for train lines. That is just stupid. Also multiple competing local bus services is equally stupid. Some services just don’t fit in the neoliberal model.

[-] user75736572@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ther's no competition if you have a bureaucrats approving only specific train lines if you just live it to the free market it'll be alright

[-] markr@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’ll try this slowly: it would be idiotic to have multiple rail systems providing the same routes.

Please research ‘natural monopolies’ because that is the history of the unregulated development of the rail industry. If you are going to spout right-libertarian ideology, at least have some understanding of the history of capitalism.

[-] user75736572@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Ther's nothing wrong with having many rail systems serve the same route but the bureaucracts won't let it happen, which is exactly how monopolies are formed. If the government only approves one company to build a train somewhere of course it's going to be a monopoly. Monopolies cannot happen in a completely free market, without artificial boundaries competition will always be able to provide a service more attractive to consumers expect if the established company is providing an excellent service

[-] miles@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

yes please i really want even more of my already-overpopulated living space consumed by redundant concrete and metal, sounds great!

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
171 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

58150 readers
7248 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS