I once heard that in the middle of 20th century, public transportation in the USA was widely privatized and bought by automotive manufacturers, and then wilfully left to rot, so that people would buy more cars.

However, I can’t find anything backing that up. Do you know whether that’s true, and where I can find some sources for that?

  • theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It is worth noting that “loses money” and “costs money” are generally just differences of perspective. For many, public services don’t necessarily need to be profitable monetarily to be worth their cost.

    eta: I would like to clarify that this is in no way disagreement. More of a yes-and, than a but. I agree with you completely.

    • yyyesss?@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      I love that distinction. And where does the money go? “Lose money” implies it vanishes, which isn’t the case. It goes to companies that then pay their workers. It circulates which should be the point.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Public transport almost never runs a profit on it’s own, but if you manage it through the government, then the added tax income from vastly more people being able to work better jobs, more than make up the shortfall.