You must log in or # to comment.
This type of shit happens every single time something is privatized
and yet, we still have lots of mouth breathers running around supporting privatizing services
Propaganda, unfortunately, works way too well.
indeed
Something something Ukraine memo selling off all publicly owned services to US investment capital
That’s because there are too many regulations. Once we rid of all them, corporations will have the freedom to invest better and let profits trickle down. Right now they have no choice but to feed us saw dust and charge us a 500% premium for electricity. Their hands are tied
It’s just greed.
: “But muh fweeeeedumz! Why do you hate freedumbs?! At least be happy dear porky is making money off of this! It’s GoOd FoR tHe EcOnOmy!1!1!1!1!1”I know for a fact that there are many chomping at the bit to privatize the electricity infrastructure in my province, which is hilarious to me because our significant hydro electric generation capabilities are one of the only competitive advantages we have here. If anything we should be expanding our infrastructure, selling electricity to other provinces and states, and encouraging things like data centers and what not to set up shop here. Instead I would not be surprised if we end up like Alberta sometime in the next 10-20 years.
I find it amazing that people keep acting as if we don’t know what will happen when private services get privatized despite the fact that we have mountains of evidence for that
I guess that just goes to show how strong the propaganda and mythology of the “free market” and liberal economics really is. I mean, literally less than a decade ago where I live they finished privatizing the telecom services, and internet/phone/TV have probably roughly doubled in price since then, if not more. Ask anyone and they will say that its worse now, yet many of those people would still support privatizing hydro or insurance or whatever. Mind boggling.
“you don’t remember how bad it was when the state ran the service”
Reminds me when Europe still got energy from Russia. They offered Europe a fixed price contract, but Europe insisting on letting the free market decide. So when the prices skyrocketed (I believe due to the invasion), Europe demanded Russia lower the price, but they couldn’t because they already signed a contract lol. Belarus didn’t suffer from the increased prices because they agreed to a fixed price contract for energy.
that’s what happens when you get high on your own supply :)
Hey, let’s take the distribution methods for basic necessities and give it a profit motive, so that if it doesn’t make money, the basic necessities won’t exist anymore! What a brilliant idea!
Fucking removed.
Yes but have you considered they don’t have to live under authoritarianism? Checkmate tankies. 😎 😎
Damn, Alberta really is the Texas of Canada
there is a lot of cultural cross pollination happening between the two thanks to the oil industry
We are suffering
Alberta, looking at California in 2000 when Enron was manipulating the market to cause blackouts, and saying “yeah that’s a good idea”
I live in Germany and in my city they’re slowly trying to re-publicize (is this even a word? I won’t look it up, my mobile data is scarce - if anyone was wondering why I’m not looking stuff up) energy sector and I’m all for it. Their private Internet/phone providers ruined the infrastructure so much they’re lightyears behind other countries, including those which are “poorer” economically. Capitalism literally slows down progress and makes more people poorer.
in my city they’re slowly trying to re-publicize (is this even a word?
The term for that is municipalization.
A sexy term no doubt, however, there’s zero chance I can type that. :(
Hahaha you would make for a poor menshevik, it was one of their main program points before february 1917.
It’s almost like introducing a profit motive doesn’t in fact drive prices down 🤔
Thing is that it can in the early stages which is how people end up getting tricked. Private industry starts undercutting public services to get a foothold, and then once they become entrenched then the quality of service goes down and price goes up.
And by the time you’ve bought the bridge, there’s nobody else offering a similar service with which to compare prices so the scam goes on and on until the infrastructure collapses under the weight of zero maintenance under the privatised model.
Yes but what if there were 20+ bridges all competing for your traffic in a truly free market? In fact why do we need bridges anyway the free market should just pave over rivers for more freedom
Is there even a plausible claim like a bunch of infrastructure burning down? Or did they just openly jack prices up for no reason?
mostly just jacking up prices cause they can
Based on my utility bills most of the cost is from “service fees.” I don’t know what service they’re providing that warrants charging us up the ass but, yeah, it’s service fees.
I think it’s the price customers pay to serve the energy shareholders. Someone’s got to pay the person writing all those dividend cheques.
Every time I get the monthly bill in the mail my soul rots even more. It’s just constant anxiety on whether I can afford this month or not.
But have you considered that it’s a voluntary fee that you’re paying after choosing from a wide selection of electricity providers? Checkmate communists.
I was looking for this graph to post! It’s been tough out here in Alberta….
For profit industry will always be more expensive than public. Because the goal of the public industry is to provide the public with that good/service. It often sells at cost or even at a deficit since it does not need to profit. Its prices will only raise if material or labor costs increase.
Meanwhile private industries will always be looking for ways to increase price. Whether it be by cutting wages even further, adding pointless additions to up sell, “shrinkflation” etc. Because the goal is to make money despite the actual value of it’s good/service.
Because the goal of the public industry is to provide the public with that good/service. It often sells at cost or even at a deficit since it does not need to profit.
reminds me of how many western commentators disparage china’s high speed rail system for running at a loss and supposedly wasting money. yes, of course it does. the trains are the point, not the pursuit of profit. the government pays for high speed rail because it’s a needed service, and the costs of operating hsr is worth it in the long run and will even pay for itself.
Exactly. Money from train ticket sales is not the point of the public transport. The payoff lies in the population being able to travel the country cheaply. Yes the train will run a loss but the country as a whole will greatly benefit with the ease of transportation.
Capitalists only care about the sale. It is very short sided when trying to improve a nation as a whole. A private industry must constantly grow more and more to stay in business. This is detrimental in the long run as it will constantly require more and more degradation of the service and collusion with the state to maintain this profit growth. Overall, it will cost the population much more than the “losses” a public industry would.
Somehow, capitalists are unable to be satisfied with profit generated from millions of people being able to move to many cities and consume products in a few hours. There is no long term vision
Yes but have you ever thought about if it was a truly free market? We could have 20+ electric providers all with their own dedicated infrastructure and telephone poles competing with each other! That would make perfect sense and I am very smart dot libertarian
Funniest thing is that we can compare it somewhat to internet providers, and of course it works like predicted, local providers each had their own nets, the access was shitty, expensive and had barely any coverage, then the big companies like phone and tv providers came in and locals bankrupted instantly except the rare cases of those that got public support (from the local administration) and access to public infrastructure.
Reminds me of the book “A libertarian walks into a Bear”.
