468
Millennials are the first generation to move left as they age (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/world
151 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Millennials are bucking trends, becoming an increasingly progressive voting bloc and rewriting the long-held rules of politics, writes Isabella Higgins.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 93 points 11 months ago (9 children)

Costs in general. I just stand there in the grocers thinking "shit, they should nationalize the food chain"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 59 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    It's hard to think of powerful businesses I interact with from day-to-day that government shouldn't either completely nationalize or expropriate their property and split up.

    • grocery chains √

    • power companies(including gas stations)? √

    • internet providers? √

    • real estate companies/landlords √

    Yadda yadda yadda...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

    Problem being is it's hard to write laws appropriately.

    A huge difference in government and private enterprise is that government is 100% inflexible. Doesn't matter how stupid the results of the law are, nor how damaging. The workers have to follow the letter of the law until the state or federal Congress changes it. Government workers have no incentive to make sure you're satisfied. What are you gonna do? Not come back?

    My pet theory is that conservatives hate government because they've encountered this, don't understand this is how it has to be. This is also why they want to privatize everything because "government stupid". No, you don't want government bending rules, unlike...

    Private concerns can instantly say, "This is fucking stupid and we're changing tack." If a customer finds themselves victim of a stupid edge case, the company can work around it for them. They're motivated to keep customers happy.

    There are cases for both sorts of ownership. Tag offices in Oklahoma were privately owned nightmares with some of the highest rates in the nation. Here in Florida we can not only get tags, but a myriad of other services at the county tax office. Cheap too! OTOH, tags were a SecState thing in Illinois and it was a total nightmare. Boss knew if you had to renew tags you were taking no less than half a day off.

    I'd be interested in seeing how more public/private combos work. Our power company was such a thing, elected board members and all. We had stupid cheap power until, guess what, it was sold to a private power company. Some people's rates doubled and most of us saw 40% increases.

    To your examples, in order:

    • Private grocery chains because I want them in competition, but break up and deny the monopolistic companies.

    • Power companies, government. Nobody has a choice anyway, only one set of infrastructure, simple enough to legislate.

    • Gas stations, private. Again, I want them competing and it's not like they're gouging us on gas prices. The margin is a few pennies per gallon, not enough to keep them in business without selling other goods.

    • Real estate/landlords, private, but with serious fucking guard rails and renter protections. How the hell is there a legal app for them to collude on prices?!

    And YES, these monsters should be split back up. We've become so used to megacorps we're not remembering what the past was like. If you brought anyone, even a Republican, in from the 80s, they'd fucking scream over the state of mergers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    Then government is a shit form of collaboration, or at least totally incompatible with capitalism/private ownership.

    Also, corporations are just as inflexible. You know that, Right? Have you ever dealt with an insurance company? A software company?

    Fuck that. No more non-personal/communal ownership, no more government.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Western Australia's main power utilities are both private companies with the sole share holder being the state government. Power is reliable, systems are well maintained, particularly given the wide areas covered and the low density of population, prices are reasonable, the energy minister has input into direction and planning but mostly stays out of operation, executive and everyone below are all hired on merit

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    You could say the same about some kleptocratic states too. Without the maintenance nor the reliability. It's about integrity and accountability whether it's state owned or government owned. The difference is motives for individuals involved. Capitalism values the profit motive. Public private partnerships value how it looks to voters, who are generally worse off as they pay more for what would be more efficient under government control. Having two competing is probably an attempt to get the best of both worlds.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    They don't compete, they are regionally separate, western Australia is the size of three texas' but with a population of 3m. Neither utility is a public private partnership, they are private companies setup and run by the state government for the people. The organisations are like private companies but the owners are the people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent