At least during my lifetime it seems all the state owned corporations were better when state owned and turned to absolute shit once privatized when you look at service quality.

Complete nonsense.

Writing purely self-referential comments seems like it is a bit of an odd hobby, don't you think?

I witnessed more than five such privatizations in two different countries and they all ended up with the "investors" not even investing the minimum of what would have been necessary to keep the infrastructure operational. A decade later service quality is abysmal, infrastructure so bad that the state has to come in and help.

And these are only examples from postal services and public transport from the european regions I lived in, but I heard/read similar stories from nearly every of the 27 EU countries. The nations that still have exceptional services are the ones that didn't privatize them.

So if what I said is complete nonsense you surely have no problem pointing me to the wonderland where privatization lead to better services, lower prices and better service coverage — but we both know that never was the true interest behind privatizing anyways, don't we ; )

I wouldn't want to live in a while where BT was the only telephone company, BBC was the only TV channel, There was only one nationalised newspaper, where Royal Mail was the only company allowed to deliver parcels.

If you look at the worse services in your country they are usually the worse: from applying for a passport, to filling in pointless forms to high prices. Almost everything is better off in competition than making the natural market illegal.

It's a good way to ensure we don't get any wealth.

"It works until you run out of other people's money"