• Anticorp
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You missed the message for the word. Call it whatever you need to, facility or what not. The point is that it’s awful in places like California.

    • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      The point is that it’s awful in places like California.

      You seriously think privatizing California’s DMV would be an improvement?

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      in places like California

      so a government can run a DMV well? if such a thing is specific to some places and not others, you cannot make it a general rule, can you?

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I can tell that person is probably not in California (or is maybe some kind of MAGA sucker from the Central Valley) if they complain about the California DMV and want it privatized like the circus fire that is the state’s PG&E monopoly.

        • Anticorp
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m certainly not a MAGA proponent. I didn’t say I wanted it privatized. It was meant to be an example of the disaster that governments can make of something relatively simple. We can’t afford that with our primary food supply. So if it was handed off to the government, extreme measures would need to be taken to ensure it’s properly funded, managed by competent and qualified people, and well insulated from corruption. It’s not as simple as “just let the government do it”.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            It was meant to be an example of the disaster that governments can make of something relatively simple.

            You claim you’re not calling for privatizing the DMV. So what are you calling for?

            If you say “increased funding and more staffing with expanded benefits” then I will nod to that.

            We can’t afford that with our primary food supply. So if it was handed off to the government, extreme measures would need to be taken to ensure it’s properly funded, managed by competent and qualified people, and well insulated from corruption. It’s not as simple as “just let the government do it”.

            The current status quo is failing and more than that is cumulatively destroying the planet. think-mark

            • Anticorp
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I wasn’t calling for anything. The conversation is about the meat industry, not about the DMV.

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I wasn’t calling for anything.

                Saying “government intervention bad” over and over again is calling for more of the status quo. That’s what a default position is if you condemn proposals to change it and say you “aren’t calling for anything” otherwise.

      • Anticorp
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, actually. The DMV in Washington is surprisingly well run. But the California DMV is a nightmare that we cannot allow to happen with our food supply. Ultimately it’s not a simple handover and there would need to be abundant safeguards in place to ensure our food supply is managed competently and insulated from corruption.