Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, many railroads WERE built with private money - but almost always the LAND on which to build the railways was GIVEN to the RR company BY the government - thus even in THOSE cases it was a JOINT venture with (in effect) the government subsidizing the construction by giving the RR companies FREE LAND - and without that FREE LAND the RR infrastructure would likely NOT have been built.
Ken
Ridiculous assumption.
Public demand for faster and safer travel would have made the acquisitions happen regardless.
Public demand for faster and safer travel would have made the acquisitions happen regardless.
Maybe, maybe not - you have NO WAY of proving that since it NEVER HAPPENED. There is certainly no way to prove HOW QUICKLY it would have happened since it ALL happened with government financial backing. All we can say for certain is - there has never been a major infrastructure project that took take without government support. EVER.
Maybe, maybe not - you have NO WAY of proving that since it NEVER HAPPENED. There is certainly no way to prove HOW QUICKLY it would have happened since it ALL happened with government financial backing. All we can say for certain is - there has never been a major infrastructure project that took take without government support. EVER.
Ken
you have no way of proving that private financing wouldn't have been more efficient and less costly to the taxpayer. there is no way to prove how slowly it would've happened either. the key difference is that there'd be fewer white elephants littering the country. we might not have had as infrastructure but imo it would be far better maintained and managed.
When you consider that the majority of our defense budget is used to defend oil interests around the world, the real cost we're paying for gas is around $10. it would be interesting to see if the left would still be as hostile to domestic drilling if that was the actual price at the pump. it would also be interesting to see if the right would still be that hostile to alternative energy if the real cost of gas wasn't swept under the carpet.
Yet, the same amount/weight of gold, still buys the same amount of fuel??
you have no way of proving that private financing wouldn't have been more efficient and less costly to the taxpayer. there is no way to prove how slowly it would've happened either. the key difference is that there'd be fewer white elephants littering the country. we might not have had as infrastructure but imo it would be far better maintained and managed.
There's no way to know what WOULD have happened had private enterprize built the railways without government aid. What we DO know is that it NEVER HAPPENED - and there are REASONS for that: BOTH the risk AND the cost were too great for the RR companies to want to deal with. The transcontinental railway system was built with MASSIVE federal aid - both in the form of FREE land grants AND government bonds. And this is true for virtual ALL of the nations infrastructure, whether it be the RR system, the highway system, the power grid or the internet. It was ALL built with massive government support. This is true both HERE in the United States AND in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH.
YOU may BELIEVE that private industry COULD & SHOULD do this on it's own but your belief has NO FACTS to back it up because IT'S VIRTUALLY NEVER BEEN DONE by private industry WITHOUT government aid. All you have is your "theory" with practically NO EXAMPLES to prove it would work.
The reality is virtually ALL major infrastructure both HERE & AROUND THE WORLD has been are done largely with government money. There are reasons for this: Both the risk & the cost are generally too great for private business alone to bear. Only government has the resources to take on such large & risky ventures. THAT'S why private industry ALWAYS turns to government for help on such projects.
And THAT is a fact.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 02-22-2011 at 08:06 PM..
There's no way to know what WOULD have happened had private enterprize built the railways without government aid. What we DO know is that it NEVER HAPPENED - and there are REASONS for that: BOTH the risk AND the cost were too great for the RR companies to want to deal with. The transcontinental railway system was built with MASSIVE federal aid - both in the form of FREE land grants AND government bonds. And this is true for virtual ALL of the nations infrastructure, whether it be the RR system, the highway system, the power grid or the internet. It was ALL built with massive government support. This is true both HERE in the United States AND in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH.
YOU may BELIEVE that private industry COULD & SHOULD do this on it's own but your belief has NO FACTS to back it up because IT'S VIRTUALLY NEVER BEEN DONE by private industry WITHOUT government aid. All you have is your "theory" with practically NO EXAMPLES to prove it would work.
The reality is virtually ALL major infrastructure both HERE & AROUND THE WORLD has been and is done largely with government money.
And THAT is a fact.
Ken
i have to take issue with this no private infrastructure position of yours. the majority of cellular networks globally were privately funded as are cable and satellite tv providers. many airports around the world were privately funded. sports stadiums, high rise building and bridges have been privately funded. many of the roads in the US in the late 19th century and early 20th were private. most gated and deed restricted communities fund their own internal roads and there are some who have their own water treatment and sewage facilites. with utilities gouging on price, it's only a matter of time before some of these go with their own power generation. most of the oil wells, and many mines are/were started with private money. there were some instances like in portugal where the shell oil company offered to build a national highway network in exchange for exclusivity on those roads. there were huge shipping lines which were privately funded. i just don't get where you get the idea that everything which has improved your std of living has come from the govt. it simply isn't true.
you have to also consider the huge damage govts do when they ordain one company/method/model over others. the issue which a have with govt involvement is that anytime the govt subsidizes an industry, it does so at the expense of competing elements within that industry. take ethanol. the govt heavily subsidised ethanol to a point where algae oil might have seemed less feasible. let's take the hypothetical scenario where you were manufacturing hydrogen cars at the same price as electric cars. the cars are identical in looks, performance and running costs. you each have a 50% makretshare. the govt cames in and subsidises the electric car company, making their cars much cheaper. are they not killing off your business? is what they have done fair? what are they doing to the potential of your product?
With subsidies comes control, I'm sure it's just coincidence that our government inserts itself into all these projects.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
