logoalt Hacker News

cogman10yesterday at 12:31 AM4 repliesview on HN

Because we have governments anemic to running anything or regulating any business.

They are much more likely to continue shoveling cash into private businesses through subsidies then to want to setup and/or run the same business for a fraction of the cost.


Replies

throwaway2037yesterday at 11:02 AM

    > Because we have governments anemic to running anything or regulating any business.
This comment is weird to me. The US has one of the most effective environmental regulators in the world (EPA). The FAA and FDA are also excellent. The securities markets in the US are the global gold standard of regulation (SEC, etc.).
show 1 reply
immibisyesterday at 1:04 AM

Think the word that fits there is "allergic".

tjwebbnorfolkyesterday at 12:34 AM

The same one who just said PE isn't allowed to buy any more residential real estate?

I hope they go after hospitals next.

show 4 replies
andy99yesterday at 12:38 AM

Government is probably the worst actor to run healthcare facilities. It’s not that different from PE, except with more administrative bloat. I’d be curious to compare US PE run facilities with government run facilities in Canada.

There is not an easy answer here, it basically a cost centre that whoever runs it, the welfare state is incentivized to spend as little as possible on it. PE is almost certainly a bad solution. If they can destroy a restaurant or other low impact business, I hate to think what they’d do to businesses that care for people. You’d get the healthcare equivalent of Burger King. But with government you get the equivalent of the DMV.

show 5 replies