Really? Because I can cite EVERY example where it did. The one caveat? It couldn't have been a government granted monopoly on that product. As long as anyone who cared to compete could? It's ALWAYS been better.
+Sirellyn Y Gee, when you didn't post any examples it was almost as if you were a tool! --A sensible discussion would offer examples and counterexamples, than an attempt to assess the overall consequences of privitization, whether it tended to work, and if it did, under what circumstances.
@Blair Schirmerx - Well that's funny. Neither did you. Perhaps that's what an unfounded generalization feels like. First, when talking about "lower prices" it must be comparing apples to apples. In other words, subsidized prices aren't cheaper if the cost of running the whole affair is much more expensive. That money comes from you via taxes and inflation, you just don't see it. Even then, magically some of the private versions manage to STILL give better prices and services. Given the handicap of not being able to directly steal from taxpayers and call it "cheaper" this is amazing. Let's even use two very close countries as examples. Canada and the US. The DMV in the US vs the privatized registration branches in Canada. Please tell me the privatized version has worse service and lower prices. Or even the TSA vs Canada's version CATSA who still isn't great being it's a private public partnership (only a bare shade better than a fully run department) has far better service than the TSA: www.catsa.gc.ca/screening-officer-positions Or the US postal service vs Fedex, UPS and Amazon. And yes all three count because you actually have a choice of which one you want to go with, rather than one governing monopoly. I could go on with Swedish Taxi service, British Columbia Liquor stores, South Africa security services. Pretty much every single example you can come up with, as long as it's not a government granted monopoly (I'm looking at you Haliburton, Comcast/Verizon/Sprint, the corn syrup lobby, etc) Its demonstrably better than any government version. Sometimes by factors of even 10 or 100, or in China and Russia's case more than 10,000x... (Where they went first as socialized as they could possibly go) It's that insane.
@@sirellyn4391 have you heard of the social crisis in Chile ? Its main cause is the hard core privatization in the system. Chile was the biggest liberalism lab of the world. Now, there is huge debt, high inequality, no social welfare ... impoverishment of the lands and the richest have become way richer thanks to this .
As the refugee crisis reached Germany, was needed toilet and wash containers for taking stock. The price rose from 5,500 € to 45,000 €. Just an example.
Your comment makes no sense. "For taking stock"? In any case, no. The refugee problem caused Germany's population to increase by about 1%. So, why are you being hysterical?
I can think of no instance where privatization has ever lead to a better service or product at a lesser price.
Really? Because I can cite EVERY example where it did.
The one caveat? It couldn't have been a government granted monopoly on that product. As long as anyone who cared to compete could? It's ALWAYS been better.
+Sirellyn Y Gee, when you didn't post any examples it was almost as if you were a tool! --A sensible discussion would offer examples and counterexamples, than an attempt to assess the overall consequences of privitization, whether it tended to work, and if it did, under what circumstances.
@Blair Schirmerx - Well that's funny. Neither did you. Perhaps that's what an unfounded generalization feels like.
First, when talking about "lower prices" it must be comparing apples to apples. In other words, subsidized prices aren't cheaper if the cost of running the whole affair is much more expensive. That money comes from you via taxes and inflation, you just don't see it. Even then, magically some of the private versions manage to STILL give better prices and services. Given the handicap of not being able to directly steal from taxpayers and call it "cheaper" this is amazing.
Let's even use two very close countries as examples. Canada and the US. The DMV in the US vs the privatized registration branches in Canada. Please tell me the privatized version has worse service and lower prices.
Or even the TSA vs Canada's version CATSA who still isn't great being it's a private public partnership (only a bare shade better than a fully run department) has far better service than the TSA:
www.catsa.gc.ca/screening-officer-positions
Or the US postal service vs Fedex, UPS and Amazon. And yes all three count because you actually have a choice of which one you want to go with, rather than one governing monopoly.
I could go on with Swedish Taxi service, British Columbia Liquor stores, South Africa security services.
Pretty much every single example you can come up with, as long as it's not a government granted monopoly (I'm looking at you Haliburton, Comcast/Verizon/Sprint, the corn syrup lobby, etc) Its demonstrably better than any government version.
Sometimes by factors of even 10 or 100, or in China and Russia's case more than 10,000x... (Where they went first as socialized as they could possibly go) It's that insane.
@@sirellyn4391 have you heard of the social crisis in Chile ? Its main cause is the hard core privatization in the system. Chile was the biggest liberalism lab of the world. Now, there is huge debt, high inequality, no social welfare ... impoverishment of the lands and the richest have become way richer thanks to this .
As the refugee crisis reached Germany, was needed toilet and wash containers for taking stock. The price rose from 5,500 € to 45,000 €. Just an example.
Your comment makes no sense. "For taking stock"?
In any case, no. The refugee problem caused Germany's population to increase by about 1%. So, why are you being hysterical?
Why are you so pissed off? This is an example of how money is made with refugees. You do not know my political views on refugee policy in Germany.
Antony Lowenstein maaa maaaaaaaaaaaaaaan from DOWWWWN TOWN
now that one that never occured to me. i can only say there is a lot of evil in the world.