DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
Tiny response since I just got back from work- I mentioned the word "utopia" since railey just made the suggestion that under a totally free market, things naturally spiral towards that state, which is true if only the most positive outcomes happen.
My reference to Nestlé and Amazon were two specific ones that I think you misunderstood. Nestlé buys up water sources wherever it can, which deprives areas of clean water piped to them. You should be able to find examples of this fairly easily. Another point I wasn't mentioning was their use of child labour in developing countries though, which without regulation is something that is pretty much encouraged in a totally free market, since it maximises profits when the company has a monopoly on the area (they can pay inhumanely low wages in third-world countries since there's no competition for wages). As for Amazon, they're known for making rather unfair deals with publishers due to their monopoly on the market, but I don't know enough of the specifics to go deeper into that.
Public transport in rural areas, like trains and buses, can indeed be a net loss- but they're necessary for society, so those services are still offered despite being unprofitable. I imagine taxpayers are okay with paying for this, since they can empathise with people who aren't as well off and don't want them to get fucked over more just for being poor, y'know?
I don't know a lot about Nestle and Amazon, it'd take a lot of knowledge of the context to make accurate assessments of the situations and theorise about the possible free-market solutions and mechanism, right now I'm more just pointing out the superiority of a more liberal economy compared to a socialist one.
Though I actually just watched a video of talk of the Nestle CEO, he didn't say anything unreasonable at all, unlike what the hysterical Left-wing news sources seem to make out when I search the topic. He just said that water is a resource that should be privatised and have a have a market value like any foodstuff, and that way people wouldn't waste in among other things. He also made some other good points, the only thing I disagree with is about GMOs. Of course all the comments are like
THIS IS THE FACE OF PURE EVIL CAPITALIZM. Lol, this generation.
So, what exactly is stopping private transport from running to rural areas? Let's assume kids from a rural community are taking a bus to a town 100 miles away, assuming the cost per mile is around $1, a rough estimate from
here, and the bus is running close to capacity at around 40 kids the average fare then would be around $3 per commute. There's not really any situation that truly necessity these expensive and inefficient public services, unless you do what some people do which is to start coming up with even more absurd and unlikely "what if" scenarios".
The public sector actually creates a lot more problems than people realise.
this video does a good job of showing how much public employees of even basic and unskilled labour jobs like trash collectors are overpayed, and how the extremely generous retirement benefits can bankrupt whole states. However I don't think that the biggest cost is the monetary cost, but like I was saying, the cost to these unfortunate kids who have to go through the public schooling system which suffer from lack of competition and a system which favours the schools and teachers rather than students.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG8w9PcA-igI've been to both public and private schools, and I genuinely think my life would have turned out much better if I had stayed at the private school. It was much greater than the public ones.
Now, this child labour thing is a common topic but there isn't much understanding of it. The Left looks at sweatshops and child labour and they think the solution is simply
regulation, that these evil corporations are exploiting the poor workers and if only there were
regulation everything would be fixed, and that the strongarm of the state is the solution to everything. Obviously this oversimplified way of thinking doesn't actually fix the problem, which is the poverty in that area, along with corrupt governments and things along those lines.
The reason that child labour exists is due to economic reasons; is our rich Western society it makes much more sense to send children to school so they can grow up and become professionals rather than employing them in unskilled labour jobs which they are very poor at. and which adults can do a lot better. It's a net gain for society. However in these poor third world regions they don't have that luxury and children will work as soon as they can just to survive, whether on a farm or in a factory. Leftists don't realise this any when they stop the sweatshops they are preventing these extremely poor people from choosing the best option they have, and I have heard stories where this has happened and the children have been forced into prostitution or they have died. So instead, these are the people that could benefit from capitalism and industrialization more than anything.
BTW, I didn't understand what you said about free markets spiraling towards the state, and positive outcomes or whatever.