What exactly is "your experience"? You've ridden two subway systems and attributed their failures to not using your pet economic structure, and watched a fictional movie from 1952?
It doesn't take a whole lot of googling to find thousands of example of poorly run government services. I gave 2 I thought were obvious examples but you can search and find 1000s more.
I'm not defending evil and corrupt PG&E. I'm only responding to the idea that government services are magically incentivized at "getting their job done right". Their incentives rarely align to "getting their job done right".
Other examples off the top of my head, public schools in the USA who have more money per student than pretty much every other country but have worse outcomes. I don't have a solution but clearly they are not "getting their job done right"
Another example might be the USA's militarized police force killing its own citizens. Some people have arguied they're incentivized to buy all the military equipment because it raises their budgets. Again, they are not targetting "getting their job done right". And again I don't know the solution. Just pointing out making something a government serivce does not magically remove all bad incentives.
> It doesn't take a whole lot of googling to find thousands of example of poorly run government services.
Perhaps, but you didn't say "Some government services are poorly run". You said:
"not my experience. Most government entities try to raise as much money as possible to protect their jobs and raise their salaries. gettingthe job done right is not remotely near top of the list."
You have not yet given an example of this. You're just pointing to random organizations' failings and saying that they're caused by incentives specific to government, without any evidence whatsoever.
Are MTA and SFMTA's failings because they are "trying to protect their jobs" or because they have to maintain aging infrastructures in a culture that idolizes cars?
Are public schools' failings because they are "raising as much money as possible" to "raise their salaries", or are they because of mandatory religion-based curriculum, mandatory standardized testing determining funding, lack of healthcare/childcare/nutrition support for parents, and parents being incarcerated?
It's clever of you to bring up police, because you can look through my previous comments and see my political bent, but keep in mind that the discussion at hand is whether government or corporate incentives lead to better results. Looking at where the money goes when overly-militarized police purchase military equipment, I think it's hard to attribute this to government incentives as compared to corporate incentives. You can't point to corporate meddling in government causing problems, and use that as justification to put the corporation in charge.
Saying "not my experience" at the beginning is pretty disingenuous, because it's become increasingly clear that you don't have any relevant experience.
The Japanese train system is privatized. In fact it's often held up as one of the most successful examples of taking a service from government run to privately run and having it wildly succeed.
