It's not about hate. If the public sector could make things cheaper, therefore saving people's taxes, how is that a bad outcome for the country's citizens?
My argument is that it sucks by design. States decided to make it suck to justify all the money poured into the private sector. If you have the same resources and the same people, it really makes no difference if something is private or public...
You asked, I answered. The only thing that changed is that modern states sold their souls to capitalism, there's nothing intrinsically better or more innovative in the private sector, it just happens to be that way nowadays because states decided so.
You just seem to distrust the public sector, as there's plenty of corruption in the private sector. You're just assuming the worst possible outcome for the sake of it.
Right, because the same people responsible for today's innovation would suddenly stop innovating if their employer was the state instead of company x. Makes sense.
Of course innovation is happening in the private sector, there is no public sector.
Having the defense of the state and the nation's citizens dependent on private industry is absolute bonkers and actually a threat to national security. It has...
It's insane how a country that revolves around military adventures doesn't have a nationalized military production. This is nothing but the traditional capitalist transfer of money from the people to big corporations.
That being said, at least...