Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Same goes for public service, profit-focused corporations can't provide the same quality of service.

This is just categorically false. Where I live our state owned telco is horrible and you have to jump through hoops to cancel your account with them. People have to keep paying them for literally months (sometimes more than 6) after they cancel their service with them to cancel as they just do not process cancellations and then sue you if you do not pay up.

Our fiber revolution was driven not by the state, but by private profit-focused corporations. In fact the state telco now also has fiber - but it costs about twice the price and then you still have to deal with a provider which is sub standard and makes it near impossible for you to cancel their service. I pay about $10 USD more a month for 100mbit/100mbit up/down FTTH than I payed for 4mbit/512k ADSL up/down from state telco.

With just about every other "utility" or "public service" the story is the same here. Police is shit so I have to pay for security if you don't want to get armed robbed raped or murdered, schools are shit so you have to pay for private schools if you want your child to be able to read and write. Electricity supply is shit - every year we have load shedding and prices keep going up while govt is lining their pockets and then looking for ways to further fuck rate payers while getting kickbacks from Russia. And now because the govt has made everything worse for years there is talk about nationalizing industries to fuel populism amongst the almost 30% (official) unemployed and many poor people as our economy has been shrinking for years (and of course this is capitalism's fault now - because private industry makes govt look bad in comparison).

It is theoretically possible to have decent services where there is no competition and govt monopoly - but it is not the norm and I would say in most cases it does not work out this way.

And where are you living? This sounds a lot like being due a high level of corruption. I think that's one challenge to overcome, you're right that public services are not automatically better

Corruption is less of a problem than incompetence and general “not giving a fuck.” Municipal infrastructure makes the most sense in relatively dense cities. But in America, cities are disproportionately where poor people live. (Contrast say Paris, where poor people live in the suburbs and rich people in the city). These are disadvantaged voting blocs that won’t (or can’t) complain that loudly when their public services suck. I saw this starkly when I lived in Wilmington and Philadelphia. The busses in Wilmington might as well not keep any schedule. But nobody cares because the DuPont executives don’t rise the bus, they live in the very nice surrounding suburbs and drive in.

Where I live is irrelevant as this speaks to the point that "profit-focused corporations can't provide the same quality of service.". They can and do all the time. Maybe not in France and maybe not in USA - but the for profit model works just fine here. Why it works so well some places and not at all in others is the real kicker.

And yes the problem is exceptionally high levels of corruption - but if the Govt does not have a self granted monopoly on providing services this provides some measure of containment for corruption and also means that you don't have to pay for everything twice as I have to do now.

And sure - I would like to have a non corrupt govt - but that won't happen ever. So people who make this blatantly false statement that Govt services will always be superior from private services is just giving fuel to the cash grab perpetrated by the Govt of my country.

So yeah, thanks, I guess - thanks for giving the govt of my country excuses for looting even more money - like they needed any to begin with.

> Where I live is irrelevant as this speaks to the point that "profit-focused corporations can't provide the same quality of service."

Um..not sure how validating your evidence is irrelevant. Or even wanting to know more about it.

And to the other poster's point, personal experience impacts interpretations a lot (in both directions). I myself consider the govt inefficient but reliable when compared to private companies. I'm not a libertarian because I trust the govt, but because I trust companies less. I've spoken with people from countries with lots of govt corruption and they find the idea of a reliable govt to be a joke. We each have a lifetime of experience to support our positions.

It is hard to make an argument if you refuse to share the 'source of your information' so to speak.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact