Irrelevant. The actual railroads are private, and Amtrak gets shafted. Look at the state of US passenger railways, and compare them to trains in France or Spain. All countries with successful passenger rail have them public.
You will find find same pattern for all examples given.
I can't help you if you intentionally misconstrue everything I write.
If you wish to continue believing that privatisation can never have negative results, please do. But even a casual reading of history or economics will demonstrate that's wrong.
I’ve done far more than a casual reading of economics, and since you can’t provide a single example of the ills of privatization I suspect your reading barely reached casual levels.
If you are going to taunt me, put in some effort and bring something to the table. Present your point of view and contribute to the conversation instead of just criticising and nitpicking.
You are just asking me to google things for you.
With your great knowledge of economics I am sure you can summarise the history of privatisation far better than I ever could, so please share your wisdom with us.
You demonstrate hypocrisy and blatant disrespect for your interlocutor.
Your 'debubking' is low-effort critisism. You've contributed nothing factual or informative. You don't even bother making claims, or aswering any of my direct questions.
You claimed Amtrak is an example of the ills of privatization, when it’s owned by the federal government. And attributed the effects of strong government regulation in the healthcare and broadband markets to “privatization”.
My criticism is only low effort because you know so little of the subject that your world view is built on obvious misinformation.
Your critisism is so low effort you don't even bother reading - I never mentioned Amtrak. You did not bother to mention structural differences between railway networks in France and Uk, to give any example of succesfull private passenger rail, to deal with my claim that all sucessfull mass transit is public, to comment on the fact that Uk privatised national rail but they went bancrupt and the public had to pick up the tab. That despite their 'private' nature we still provide subsidies and build infrastructure.
Maybe you should be spend less time judging worldview of others and more contributing something of value to the discussion.
Amtrak is the only significant passenger train service in the US. And you didn’t mention that air travel is far faster and as cheap as rail travel, which makes a huge difference in a large country like the US, over dense little city states like Europe. Air travel is replacing train travel even in Europe and has for over 70 years.
And privatization isn’t a guarantee against bankruptcy, which is a useful part of the free market. The UK rail was bankrupt as a public entity, forcing taxpayers to pay the bill. privatization successfully increased ridership and customer service. And it’s still privatized, Railtrak was only one of the group of companies created from privatization.
So again, do you have any real example that shows privatization doesn’t work?
You have gone from claim that Amtrak is public, then private, then back and forth again. You seem to think this half-assed service proves any point you want to make whenever convenient.
"you didn’t mention that air travel is far faster"? - Ow Really?
You've done nothing to address the question I've asked three times - show me privately owned railway or mass transit that performs as well, as the rail network in France or Spain. I am done here, please troll elsewhere.
US broadband is run by local monopolies established by government action.
US Healthcare is heavily regulated, and grew massively expensive only after regulations were added, and preconditions were excluded.
All US prisons have problems.
You have any real examples?