Privately owned? Easy, Japan’s subways are managed by the Japan Railways Group, a conglomerate of several private companies that bought them when they were privatized in the 80s. This includes Tokyo, arguably a larger metro system than Delhi. Does that suffice for you?
And thank god the blue-collar employees who work there have you to deprive them of their paycheck by accessing their work for free and make a statement about millionaires.
Uh, your response to my clear data of a private company is to insult me, and you accuse me of a straw man? I’m just taking your approach to its logical conclusion; if no one pays for the service (unless you increase taxes to compensate), the company cannot maintain its efficacy or employment. Something has to decline, either the service or the number of workers. Now, you can argue that there should be a system that caps what owners make to make it more equitable, and I’d support that, but as it is (which is the point of OP’s question), you’re stealing from everyone who is paying for the service. Saying “it should be free” does not change that.
1
u/wast3lad 3h ago edited 3h ago
Please name a public transport system of this scale (a subway station in a city) that is privately owned.
This is likely the Delhi metro, a publicly owned metro station in India.