> In practice, they have all the flaws of both the private and public sectors and end up being inefficient, ineffective, and expensive. (cf. housing, military contractors, etc.)
Depends in which practice. In Europe (e.g. Slovenia), public universities are reasonably good, cheap (free), and serve the majority of the population. In the UK, I think council housing was a great idea - until they started selling it off (i.e. privatizing it).
I'm not sure you understand what I was referring to. Public-private partnerships are where the government works in concert with private enterprise to do something (such as paying for it, while the enterprise actually does the work).
Public universities are simply public. There's no problem with them and they can in fact be both good and cheap.
> In the UK, I think council housing was a great idea - until they started selling it off (i.e. privatizing it).
Exactly. If the government wants to operate public housing, that's fine. The problem is when the government starts giving private enterprises control of the housing and the opportunity to make profits while government still foots the bill.
Both. I was being sarcastic because there already is a low-cost community college system in the US. We just need to allow them to offer bachelor's degrees.
Depends in which practice. In Europe (e.g. Slovenia), public universities are reasonably good, cheap (free), and serve the majority of the population. In the UK, I think council housing was a great idea - until they started selling it off (i.e. privatizing it).