They are saying the government should not give money to loss making private companies (that keep profit when things are going well).
If something cannot be done profitably but provides an important service to a society, it should be owned by the government on behalf of the people .
Water supply is the most obvious example. Trains is another . As many companies are finding - it’s not easy to do this profitably - without big subsidies - because the infrastructure development and maintenance is capital intensive.
Private companies driven by a profit motive, start to cut corners resulting in a degradation of service. If it’s a TV, people get more re-runs and grumble. If it’s a water company- people get sick. If it’s a train company - people can’t get around and the economy is hurt.
So the argument is, a lot of the stuff essential to society, should be protected from ‘the profit motive’. To ensure widespread availability and quality.
The citizenry is then taxed appropriately to fund it.
No one does - that’s not what’s being said here .
They are saying the government should not give money to loss making private companies (that keep profit when things are going well).
If something cannot be done profitably but provides an important service to a society, it should be owned by the government on behalf of the people .
Water supply is the most obvious example. Trains is another . As many companies are finding - it’s not easy to do this profitably - without big subsidies - because the infrastructure development and maintenance is capital intensive.
Private companies driven by a profit motive, start to cut corners resulting in a degradation of service. If it’s a TV, people get more re-runs and grumble. If it’s a water company- people get sick. If it’s a train company - people can’t get around and the economy is hurt.
So the argument is, a lot of the stuff essential to society, should be protected from ‘the profit motive’. To ensure widespread availability and quality.
The citizenry is then taxed appropriately to fund it.