5 ms·

I think the inefficiency of state controlled transit is worth discussing, but I think these examples are a bit cherrypicked and don't necessarily support claims

I think the inefficiency of state controlled transit is worth discussing, but I think these examples are a bit cherrypicked and don't necessarily support claims like "[the private sector] would do a far, far superior job by comparison to the state." Unregulated private sector investing destroyed the traincar transit systems in the United States, and helped set a general national attitude towards cars vs transit that is not present in countries like Argentina. There are only a few privatized subways in the world, in Japan. Your argument waves away many of the realities of building and maintaining subterranean rail transit in a profitable private company. "If the private sector could do it" is a question staked on more than just government regulation. Actually, in Argentina the use of long distance rail for mass passenger transit is increasing for the first time in years after the systems were nationalized. Feel free to disregard what I've written if I, too, have accepted the liberal mantra. Issuing such a diagnosis poisons the discussion into an argument unnecessarily and suggests you're chanting a mantra of your own. Some of your examples are wildly picked and distant from the subject at hand, or downright confusing: What nationalized "telcos" in the UK are we comparing notes with? Can we use the highly regulated Korean ISP market as a substitute? Does it really support this point to crow that the US healthcare system is superior to socialized alternatives in European countries?

cryptonector 8y ago
I said nothing about having no regulations. My use of "liberal mantra" as to one specific idea, is not an ad hominem, nor does it mean that I'm not a liberal, for example, or that I don't like liberals. It just means that that particular idea is typically championed by liberals (which I believe is true). I don't see what's offensive about that. As to long distance rail, it's not public transit, but sure, let's discuss it. I've no idea what's going on in Argentina with long distance rail. One possibility is that the roads suck, so rail looks good by comparison -- I just wouldn't know. Long distance rail has a lot of competition (cars, planes) -- it doesn't look like a long-term winner to me, but if so, that would be true regardless of which sector is to invest in rail. The UK nationalized the telephone system around the time of WWI, IIRC. I did pick wildly: because I was illustrating that different countries/localities tend to make different choices as to what to socialize, and not much evidence is needed to see that this at least appears to be true. I listed some examples, but did not make an extensive study. I suspect local politics, and the ease or difficulty (socially, culturally, politically, practically) of taking over some industry or another are the main factors in the choice of what to socialize. It really is astounding (to me) that in the U.S. it was public transit that was socialized -- everywhere you go in the U.S., the trains and buses are all state-run -- but much else was not socialized (e.g., healthcare). Telecommunications in the U.S. was -for a few decades- regulated to the point that it was not greatly different from being state-run, but healthcare, for example, was not, and neither was automobile manufacturing, and not even electric utilities (with few exceptions, such as the TVA). And it is astounding to me that Buenos Aires didn't socialize buses -- I don't know why, but perhaps it was because lots of nationalizations that happened in Argentina targeted foreign-owned businesses (always popular targets), while the bus operators must have been politically connected. Also, I did not even remotely "crow that the US healthcare system is superior to socialized alternatives in European countries". I do think the private sector does better than the public sector at such things, but that doesn't mean that every instance of one sector doing some thing goes accordingly -- it's a generalization. Stop putting words in my writing. It seems that you feel attacked, but I don't know why -- maybe attacking an idea you hold is like attacking you? But it shouldn't be.
- cryptonector 8y ago
  BTW, regulation is a good liberal idea.

cryptonector 8y ago

I said nothing about having no regulations. My use of "liberal mantra" as to one specific idea, is not an ad hominem, nor does it mean that I'm not a liberal, for example, or that I don't like liberals. It just means that that particular idea is typically championed by liberals (which I believe is true). I don't see what's offensive about that. As to long distance rail, it's not public transit, but sure, let's discuss it. I've no idea what's going on in Argentina with long distance rail. One possibility is that the roads suck, so rail looks good by comparison -- I just wouldn't know. Long distance rail has a lot of competition (cars, planes) -- it doesn't look like a long-term winner to me, but if so, that would be true regardless of which sector is to invest in rail. The UK nationalized the telephone system around the time of WWI, IIRC. I did pick wildly: because I was illustrating that different countries/localities tend to make different choices as to what to socialize, and not much evidence is needed to see that this at least appears to be true. I listed some examples, but did not make an extensive study. I suspect local politics, and the ease or difficulty (socially, culturally, politically, practically) of taking over some industry or another are the main factors in the choice of what to socialize. It really is astounding (to me) that in the U.S. it was public transit that was socialized -- everywhere you go in the U.S., the trains and buses are all state-run -- but much else was not socialized (e.g., healthcare). Telecommunications in the U.S. was -for a few decades- regulated to the point that it was not greatly different from being state-run, but healthcare, for example, was not, and neither was automobile manufacturing, and not even electric utilities (with few exceptions, such as the TVA). And it is astounding to me that Buenos Aires didn't socialize buses -- I don't know why, but perhaps it was because lots of nationalizations that happened in Argentina targeted foreign-owned businesses (always popular targets), while the bus operators must have been politically connected. Also, I did not even remotely "crow that the US healthcare system is superior to socialized alternatives in European countries". I do think the private sector does better than the public sector at such things, but that doesn't mean that every instance of one sector doing some thing goes accordingly -- it's a generalization. Stop putting words in my writing. It seems that you feel attacked, but I don't know why -- maybe attacking an idea you hold is like attacking you? But it shouldn't be.

cryptonector 8y ago
BTW, regulation is a good liberal idea.