Public goods don’t have to break even or generate a profit. They still deliver my mail like clockwork, and we’ll cover any pension obligations with taxes if there’s a shortfall because of Congressional action (which is why USPS loses money, due to Congress having unreasonable pension funding requirements specifically for USPS).
If you require a bailout, you had your chance as a for profit concern. Entirely reasonable to run services at a loss as a government entity. Some services are simply expenses.
"Makes the trains run on time" is a pretty weak argument when the alternative (e.g. UPS) has a demonstrated ability to do the same thing without losing billions of dollars.
> If you require a bailout, you had your chance as a for profit concern. Entirely reasonable to run services at a loss as a government entity.
Isn't this a double standard? A private entity loses money and requires a taxpayer bailout once, they've had their chance. A government entity loses money and requires a taxpayer bailout every year, cost of doing business?
We have bailed banks and airlines out repeatedly, not once. UPS is not mandated to deliver to every address in the United States six days a week, such that USPS is.
If you require a bailout, you had your chance as a for profit concern. Entirely reasonable to run services at a loss as a government entity. Some services are simply expenses.