SneakyThunder

I like both! But it never occurred to me that there's correlation

sudo su

Why spawn additional process when you can get into shell directly with sudo -s?

Governments can also be sued

My point is they don't lose hard earned money, they just pay you money they collect forcefully from people. Basically it's not a deterrent, but simple restitution

As far as government accountability, that’s what elections are for.

It's quite rare for any candidate to talk about utilities in their campaign at all.

People here tend to not associate govt owned corporations with the government itself. And when someone brings it up, they just make some kind of excuse about what terrible person you are for accusing such a benevolent government of incompetence when they don't fix their stuff, and increase price 2

And besides, chances of reelection are so slim I doubt any politician actually going for it. It's much more profitable to simply lie about your promises

But utilities really can’t go out of business

They should declare bankruptcy and be sold to someone

loss of those services would be catastrophic

Government failed to consistently provide power — no catastrophe. Government failed to provide any water at all — no catastrophe (some people just started to pump and sell underground water)

So why private buisness not providing just one of those services for the period before it's bought, must result in catastrophe? (Just for time reference, the absence of water I described earlier already lasts longer than a year)

Governments can also be sued

My point is they don't lose hard earned money, they just pay you money they collect forcefully from people. Basically it's not a deterrent, but simple restitution

As far as government accountability, that’s what elections are for.

It's quite rare for any candidate to talk about utilities in their campaign at all.

People here tend to not associate govt owned corporations with the government itself. And when someone brings it up, they just make some kind of excuse about what terrible person you are for accusing such a benevolent government of incompetence when they don't fix their stuff, and increase price 2

And besides, chances of reelection are so slim I doubt any politician actually going for it. It's much more profitable to simply lie about your promises

But utilities really can’t go out of business

They should declare bankruptcy and be sold to someone

loss of those services would be catastrophic

Government failed to consistently provide power — no catastrophe. Government failed to provide any water at all — no catastrophe (some people just started to pump and sell underground water)

So why private buisness not providing just one of those services for the period before it's bought, must result in catastrophe? (Just for time reference, the absence of water I described earlier already lasts longer than a year)

I actually deleted my comment when I reread what you originally commented. But it seems like it's still there for some reason

As I said in reply to other person, in my country there's private businesses providing those services for cheaper price than the government alternative. Infrastructure for the most part is provided by 3rd party.

Also I keep hearing this talk about "government accountability", but what mechanism of accountability does government have? Private firms at least can go out of business or sued. Government in worst case will just pay you some of its "tax money"

In my country private companies provide their service much cheaper than government alternative. And, yes they use shared infrastructure.

Because the other option is to starve to death.

That's pessimistic... Food can be grown...

theft includes the net profits that are not shared with the workers

How businesses would innovate without accumulating capital? What happens if they suffer a loss? What would they pay their workers?

IMO it's not theft, it's just a price you're paying for someone else to deal with risc possible losses while providing you stable income.

Not talking about reserch, marketing and realization of goods/services, that someone without capital can't do on their own.

I get the reasons for most of your points from a perspective of moderate "leftist". But why "Govt ownership of essential industries like electricity, water, gas"?

You seem to somewhat believe in private enterprise, so why prevent it from providing those services at competitive cost/quality?

By that logic, thieves are virtuous and valued by society.

Thieves are forced to return what they stole, they don't (usually) accumulate capital

In reality, the wealthy are creating value for themselves and their peers

Could you please provide an example? Even something like Apple products (luxuries) are used by people that can't be called rich. So it's hard for me to understand how wealthy could create their separate economy

They did that not to (primarily) kill 3PA, but to get money from people who scrape data for AI datasets.

Although I think they could've just specified this in their ToS...