[throwawayqqq11]

Breaking down complex topics into binary black and white doesnt have to be wrong. The more important part is, how much wealth they extracted and how exactly. Was it market dominance with a superior product or amoral cost externalization.

The angle of treating transportation as regulated utility shifts the business focus away from profit onto providing services, which sometimes can cost more than your income. Similarly, would you close schools, because they didnt make enough money? Airlines are highly subsidized anyway, treating them as regulated utilities falls short of taking public ownership as public institutions, where services just cost money/subsidies.

[eru]

> Similarly, would you close schools, because they didnt make enough money?

Yes, of course. We should separate school and state.

> Airlines are highly subsidized anyway, treating them as regulated utilities falls short of taking public ownership as public institutions, where services just cost money/subsidies.

How are they highly subsidized? And where? Perhaps we should fix that, instead of adding to the problem? Two wrongs don't make a right.

[chadgpt1]

You'd force an entire generation of children to simply not be educated?

[eru]

No, why? I didn't say that we want to outlaw education.

Though I admit heavily taxing education on account of negative externalities is tempting.

[throwawayqqq11]

You mean better education for uber achievers that can pay more for it? That is already the case in the US [1] for a long time now and with expectable outcomes of poverty and wasted economic and human potential, observable today. With the melting middle class, these problems will continue to grow. Are you for euthanasia already? The next step is cutting public education even more and divert these budgets into private school via school vouchers [2]. Can you guess the outcome?

[1]: https://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/474256366/why-americas-school...

[2]: https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/no-accountab...

[jodrellblank]

> "Today I learned that a new account starts getting rate limited upon receiving its first downvote. Yay?"

Your comments are one-line thoughtless mic-drops, the system is working.

> "If a service cannot be provided for a cost below what someone will pay, the service should not be provided as providing that service is a lose-lose situation."

It can be a win-win situation, not everything is about profit. See also:

> "How did poor people who needed to fly fly when flying was expensive?"

If a poor person can fly somewhere to get a better job, they stop being a poor person. That's a win for them personally, and a win for society, and a win for future government tax income. It's also a win for the airline which moved them and got paid for it. The only time it's not a win is if you have a myopic focus on "but it costs money now and that's bad".

[ahoka]

Welcome to feudalism, yay.

[kennywinker]

Utilities and transportation should be public services, and they are in many places. Sometimes it works well, other times it works less well… usually because the capitalists lobby it into neglect and then say “see it’s not working / losing money let the private sector take over”.