> There is no data indicating this. "examples of privatisation increasing costs to us taxpayers" .. * First up, the entire US health system compared per capit

> There is no data indicating this. "examples of privatisation increasing costs to us taxpayers" .. * First up, the entire US health system compared per capita to other industrialised countries. * Any reasoned debate on whether privatization serves the public interest will include substantial links to wins and losses on either side, the classic preamble quote being something like: there are flaws endemic in both private and public ownership: private ownership is not free of its own set of problems. In short, public provision suffers when public managers pursue actions that are not in the interests of the citizenry—for example, the employment of unnecessary workers or the payment of exorbitant wages. Private provision suffers when private managers take action inconsistent with the public interest—for example, performing shoddy work in an effort to boost profits or denying service when costs are unexpectedly high. ( ~ https://hbr.org/1991/11/does-privatization-serve-the-public-interest https://hbr.org/1991/11/does-privatization-serve-the-public-... ) Your blanket denial is in error. > Based on your logic capitalism ... Not my logic, there are examples of PE companies rorting public sector funds post privatisation from around the globe .. that's public, global, empirical observation not random forum "logic". Then there's the hilarious question of "capitalism" .. do they have that still in the US? I commend you on your nom de guerre, using the pet name of Elon's dildo to reply here is pure genius. Chef's kiss.