then you have 2 possible negative outcomes:
the first is not unlike the nhs of britain, which no matter how many people tell you is ok, is still horrible. the nonchalence of some of the doctors here far extend the boundaries of what you might get in a polyclinic in singapore. at least back home they worry that they might kill you. so basically, service standards drop, and costs are kept low by: not replacing buses, reducing the number of routes, reducing the number of drivers.
either that or like i had mentioned - no incentive to keep costs down. now the government is taking responsibility for us - why do we care? the taxpayers can worry about that. wastage is rampant, and you end up with the same, just that taxes will have to increase in order to accomodate the petitions to the government to increase their operating costs.
note that i am not saying that the only possible outcome is a negative one. i'm just saying that while we could see it as an easy solution, things are never as easy as that.
by the way, i am not sure how public transport = no profits. can anyone educate me on that mentality?
you don't see teachers arguing for ministry of education that it is a loss-making organisation, do we?