some public ownership makes sense
For what?
natural monopolies
Why should someone collective own something if it wasn't their company to begin with, if they didn't build it up from nothing?
because there are things where competition is impossible
would you please be more specific @Shattered
How does that affect competition?
If a group of people own something rather then a single person.
@The Librarian railway system
There will always be people at the top, no matter what the form of government is.
that's not a natural system
There will always be multi-million dollar companies that have a monopoly on things.
Collective Ownership could only work in that case, and not on a personal level.
The only public railway system on a national level is the Amtrak program.
gov ownership, not collective
nationalized
Thats even fucking worse.
Freight distribution is own by public companies
collective is impossible
Thats democratic socalism right there.
IMPOSSIBLE.
It doesnt work.
*sigh*
americans
look at europe, in austria the rails are owned by the gov
in germany its private
in germany its expensive as hell because they can raise costs, theres no competition on THEIR rails
only Amtrak is operated by the goverment
Its not the governments place to own shit.
Goverment owned schools are shit.
you cannot just build more rails
next to the others
thats bullshit
actually you can with government permission
I would recommend you review how our railroads work
they don't work the same way as other countries
they are similar, but not the same
I dont know why people think Americans don't understand what Democratic Socialism is, like we are dumb or something. It was invented BY Socialists, because they rejected Marxism and Leninism both.
dont understand that at all.
incapable of understanding the difference between socdem and demsoc
