• TIEPilot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    37
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bang up idea, when have you ever seen the government run something correctly/efficiently?

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s tons of examples if you actually care to look. Trash pickup is an easy example. I’ve lived in places where it was managed by the city and places where it was run by private companies. The city always showed up on time and never raised prices without justification.

      Guess what the private companies did on a regular basis? And if you want to talk about efficiency let’s consider whether or not it would be better to have four different companies running four sets of trucks on four overlapping routes through the city as opposed to one entity handling the whole thing. The only thing efficient about the private companies running things is the way the money is siphoned off to some rich asshole instead of being managed by accountable local officials.

      • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        30
        ·
        2 days ago

        If its so efficient why do trash companies exist? I live in a city that has municipal pickup and all my friends that own apartments/restaurants all have private business dumpsters because the city sucks at doing a simple job…

        The government needs to stay in its lane and out of business.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If its so efficient why do trash companies exist?

          If private companies are so efficient then why does the government exist?

          Do you see why framing the question that way doesn’t help you address the actual problem? I’m guessing you don’t since you seem unwilling to consider the possibility that private ownership is not the ideal solution to every service problem. I don’t think you need more than a cursory glance at the state of the US to throw that idea out the window but things must seem pretty good to you if you’re still stuck in that mindset.

          • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            23
            ·
            2 days ago

            Not stuck in any “mindset”. Been around the block a couple of times, not my first bbq, and every time any government gets involved they fuck it up and steal. Nope not on my watch.

            And government exists as (and was intended) to hold the social contract we all have with each other together by the rule of law. Otherwise it entropy.

            • 0x0@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Been around the block a couple of times

              So has your 5 trash companies

            • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              whether your government only makes chaor or actually helps, depends a whole lot on the government and especially on the people in it. there are good governments, for example here in austria.

              the issue is more, whether your government represents you and whether they care about you. that is something that depends on your local context.

        • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          so i can tell you from an example why private companies exist that do things that are typically done by public companies … here in austria, there’s a railway operator called WestBahn. They provide passenger trains on the route from vienna to innsbruck (roughly). That’s the only route that they service. Why do they do it?

          because it’s one of the most provitable routes in all of austria. it has many, reliable passengers. servicing that route turns a profit. servicing many other routes, for example bus lines in some remote village, is still necessary, but obviously doesn’t turn a profit as it has maybe 3 passengers at a time.

          so, they pick the 1 route that’s actually very profitable, only service that, and leave every other route to the state-owned alternative. that’s what’s happening.

    • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The police and most three letter agencies, when you understand their purpose is to protect the wealthy.

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      the government

      Who said shit about the government?

      We should seize the means of production. Us.

      • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        seize

        in other words, steal. i’m actually fine with that if it’s for the greater good. the question is: would it work? do you have any idea how to run a company on that scale? there’s a whole lot of companies that have business connections all around the world. what happens to those? can you handle these connections? what if other companies think that you’re not trustworthy anymore and refuse to do business with you? how do you handle these cases?

        also what about money? just that the company is now held by workers does not somehow suddenly make it have much more money. especially grocery stores maybe have 3% profit margins, that means, even if no CEO siphons off wealth, the company’s ability to spend money increases by maybe 3%, so wages could go up 3%. just to inform you, about what’s realistic here. it’s not as if you’re suddenly having a 3x wage increase.

        • OwOarchist@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          in other words, steal.

          Not quite. “Steal” would imply that the people you’re taking it from have a legitimate claim of ownership over it.

          do you have any idea how to run a company on that scale?

          Some of us do. And maybe it doesn’t need to be such a large scale in the first place.

          what if other companies think that you’re not trustworthy anymore and refuse to do business with you?

          Seize them too.

          also what about money? just that the company is now held by workers does not somehow suddenly make it have much more money. especially grocery stores maybe have 3% profit margins, that means, even if no CEO siphons off wealth, the company’s ability to spend money increases by maybe 3%, so wages could go up 3%. just to inform you, about what’s realistic here. it’s not as if you’re suddenly having a 3x wage increase.

          What about money? If we have the labor, the tools, the farms, and the factories … what do we need money for?

          • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            i think you’re unreasonably assuming here that a revolution would happen everywhere on the planet at the same time. realistically, that’s not the case. you start with one place, then another, etc. and in the meantime you have exactly the problems that i cited. how to interact with other entities, etc?

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not the government who would control the means of production, it’s the workers. In theory they might use a vanguard party to seize it non-violently and then redistribute it, so in that case it may pass through the government’s hands. But that’s not the only way to seize the means of production. When properly done though, it would end up in the hands of the workers, every laborer owning their own tools and equipment so they can work for themselves instead of some faceless corporation.

    • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      The difference is that the government has no shareholders or incentive to turn a profit, unlike companies. However it can sell luxury goods at a high price, to subside other goods like food or housing from the markup.

      • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        No share holder, we are all share holder in the US government if you pay taxes, are you daft?

        • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Oh wow, where are my us government shares? When are the dividends getting paid out? Can I vote to invest more of my taxes into public schools so the education system does not fail it’s shareholders?

          • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            2 days ago

            You have safety, food standards, drug standard, medical standards, social safety nets, roads, etc.

            Thats the shit they are ok at, the rest leave it to companies.

            • OS2Warp@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              You have safety, food standards, drug standard, medical standards, social safety nets, roads, etc.

              And they’ve all been gutted starting with Nixon.

              Try harder troll.

            • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              And how does this work out? Do companies not lobby against safety or environmental regulations if it hurts their profits? Is the water safe to drink everywhere? Is medical care available to everyone who needs it, regardless of income? Does everyone get social security, even if he could not pay in because of health issues, accidents or other reasons that prevented him from working full time for 40 years?

              • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                12
                ·
                2 days ago

                Wow really? Where did I say companies rally for anything. I said the government does that on our behalf but we have to keep a eye on them.

                SSI should be only for people that paid in.

                • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  SSI should be only for people that paid in.

                  Let’s say im 25, on my way to work flipping burgers and some drunk driver crashes into me, leaving me disabled and i can no longer walk or use my arms. Should I just die because i have not paid enough into social security, i am no longer contributing to companies and capitalism and would “take away” benefits from other people?

                  BTW great job on shifting the goal post; never answering the previous question and always coming up with new ragebait.