this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
1431 points (98.2% liked)

memes

20173 readers
828 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If it was private, you would pay more for the same service, because the private company has all the same costs as now, but also needs to make a profit. So if you keep it public, it will cost less.

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Not necessarily, it could also be better run, more efficient with less employees.

For example maybe instead of 4 sets of at least 2 trash containers around my street there would only be 2 or 1 with all the pertinent colors (the company does more stuff than water)

But I guess this is the bad side of living in a country with more public employees than private.

[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That would be a reduction in the service quality, which is the other thing that always happens when utility services are privatised. So you get to pay more money for less service. The company has no incentive to provide a good service, because what else are you going to do?

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The government has no incentive to provide a good service because what are you going to do? Stop paying?

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You can not re-elect the ppl to decide who runs it...

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

No I can't when the people voting just say "let's the government do it" without thinking about why or what would that improve. I can vote against the current gov, I can try to convince people or make them think but as you proved in a previous reply they will just ignore it.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No you can't personally decide who runs anything, in either case. But you get a vote when it's a government, you get nothing when it's private.

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You vote with your wallets, it's has a bigger impact on how companies proceed.

I can't fight the local company because competition isn't allowed.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Spending money isn't voting.