LOLZ (NSFW)

[megman]

[Stapes]

[FreakShowFanatic]

[necronomous]

Why is this funny?

[Antknot]

Glad someone asked. So I don't look like I don't get it. (I don't.)

[CaptQuint]

[megman]

[megman]

[HighNDry]

Why is this funny?

Is the blonde a dude?

[CaptQuint]

[necronomous]

That's not funny. It's a fucking horrible idea. Why would you want inefficient and overpriced gas?

[CaptQuint]

That's not funny. It's a fucking horrible idea. Why would you want inefficient and overpriced gas?

You don't think unregulated monopolies overcharge?

[necronomous]

That's not funny. It's a fucking horrible idea. Why would you want inefficient and overpriced gas?

You don't think unregulated monopolies overcharge?

But they arent inefficient nor do they run up the tax bill.

[CaptQuint]

That's not funny. It's a fucking horrible idea. Why would you want inefficient and overpriced gas?

You don't think unregulated monopolies overcharge?

But they arent inefficient nor do they run up the tax bill.

So price gouging is fine as long as it is not inefficient, got it

[AnalHamster]

If you go with evidence rather than your gut neither model is intrinsically more efficient. Both have potential flaws that regulation can avoid. A private company with a monopoly will price gouge if it isn't prevented from doing so, because the normal check to that, competition, is not there. On the other hand it tends to lead to higher infrastructure investment.

Edumacate yoselves if interested.
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/li ... ciency.pdf

[beagleboy]

The LOLZ thread isn't very LOLZ.

[QillerDaemon]

Why is this funny?

Manly handshake? IDK...

[necronomous]

You don't think unregulated monopolies overcharge?

But they arent inefficient nor do they run up the tax bill.

So price gouging is fine as long as it is not inefficient, got it

Nice leap in logic. However, I'd rather the private company gouge me and it run well than the government gouge me and it run like shit and then tax me to get it to run like shit.

[necronomous]

If you go with evidence rather than your gut neither model is intrinsically more efficient. Both have potential flaws that regulation can avoid. A private company with a monopoly will price gouge if it isn't prevented from doing so, because the normal check to that, competition, is not there. On the other hand it tends to lead to higher infrastructure investment.

Edumacate yoselves if interested.
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/li ... ciency.pdf

I'd prefer competition, no monopolies, including the government monopoly, and shitty taxes.

[necronomous]

Why is this funny?

Manly handshake? IDK...

Maybe?

[necronomous]

The LOLZ thread isn't very LOLZ.

Maybe its ironically funny?

[CaptQuint]

But they arent inefficient nor do they run up the tax bill.

So price gouging is fine as long as it is not inefficient, got it

Nice leap in logic. However, I'd rather the private company gouge me and it run well than the government gouge me and it run like shit and then tax me to get it to run like shit.

Did you skip the last part?

[necronomous]

So price gouging is fine as long as it is not inefficient, got it

Nice leap in logic. However, I'd rather the private company gouge me and it run well than the government gouge me and it run like shit and then tax me to get it to run like shit.

Did you skip the last part?

Cause that's what the government is known for. Amirite!!

[CaptQuint]

Nice leap in logic. However, I'd rather the private company gouge me and it run well than the government gouge me and it run like shit and then tax me to get it to run like shit.

Did you skip the last part?

Cause that's what the government is known for. Amirite!!

If you feel that it is being run incorrectly you can vote in Opposition or run for the position yourself. Or I can stand in front of the company with a sign. One seems more effective than the other.

[AnalHamster]

If you go with evidence rather than your gut neither model is intrinsically more efficient. Both have potential flaws that regulation can avoid. A private company with a monopoly will price gouge if it isn't prevented from doing so, because the normal check to that, competition, is not there. On the other hand it tends to lead to higher infrastructure investment.

Edumacate yoselves if interested.
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/li ... ciency.pdf

I'd prefer competition, no monopolies, including the government monopoly, and shitty taxes.

There's only one set of infrastructure. It's an inherent monopoly that can only be mitigated by government regulation. This is why it's one of the areas where public and private actually achieve about the same efficiency results. When private companies get involved they are bound by the kinds of rules that restrain public companies from fucking over their customers.