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.
Rubbish. You can't have a private monopoly without government protection. It's never happened.
And if you privatize the entire transportation system, not just roads, you assure there is always competition and no monopolies.
When you privatize it its still a monopoly. There is no direct competition. You seem to think there is a monopoly or not as if they are distinct. There are monopolistic forces. A hot dog stand in a better location next to the ball park isn't a pure monopoly. It has monopolistic pricing which used to be called "a rent" . Rents are marginal monopolistic advantages. Some people pocket the difference, others just drive their competition out of business.
They did this in Britain. The result like everywhere else is higher costs. Classical economists recommended with natural monopolies you tax the free ride rent or put it in the public domain.
The parking meters in Chicago went private a few years back. The prices to feed a meter went through the roof. It became cheaper to park in some parking structures than to feed the meter on the street. The city was still making money off of $50 parking fines and received a huge lump sum to balance their budgets.
That is what typically always happens. That doesn't prevent people from telling me that private is always better. The problem isn't public or private; its monopoly. When monopolies are inevitable the lessor evil is public oversight or ownership.
I keep hearing liberals and other socialists say they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
Actually, no. You don't.
You keep hearing Conservatives accuse liberals of saying it. But liberals actually don't talk about it much, if at all.
Conservatives have this tendency to set up straw men and bogey men and fairies and grumpkins... because inchoate fear is what drives them.
That's really the crux of this thread.
When Reagan and Bush chopped upper income tax rates, conservatives didn't wail about redistribution. But try to undo the failures of those policies and the moaning on the right will keep a deaf person awake at night.
People choose to locate in SF because they think its worth it. When it isnt, then they relocate to Nebraska. Only if they were prohibited from moving would a monopoly exist.
Because they think its worth it That's the point. SF is worth more but not through any actual industry other than the people around it which means people who are wealthy from rising land prices are leaches. If the government allows me exclusive rights to the best land, its a monopoly. That is what monopolistic advantages are.
We didn't have paved roads between cities and towns in colonial times. In fact, the travel time was so long that men were executed before their pardon communiques would reach the executioners.
The fact that some people want us to revert back to the way things were done in colonial times is completely hair-brained.
I was responding directly to a post. It had nothing to do with who I think should build our roads.
The latest competitor to receive welfare is a company called Ameritas. They got free rent in a prime area of downtown and approved to cash in on the film and digital media tax credit. the tax credit is actually a handout. The state pays 30% of expenses and an extra 5 on top of that for labor costs within the state. The tax credits are transferable which means its as good as cash handouts (at a slight discount).
so far they've just taken local contracts and undercut local, tax paying businesses. They recently got a contract with a local bank which is a contract that my partner bid on. It's also a small outsourcing gig which means the bank laid off 3 or 4 IT workers and traded them for the subsidized workers at Ameritas.
It's a huge scam and believe me, myself and many other local IT firms have applied for these subsidies. most of us never hear back from the state while others are flatly turned down. there's zero accountability for the wealth redistribution *ahem* i mean, economic development program.
Sorry to hear that.
Attracting new business is a good thing, but not
at the expense of established local business.
Geez, your posts are terrible. I never said that anything of the sort.
Is making crap up about dissenters really how conservatives justify their hypocrisy?
What hypocrisy? Words have meanings. You may not agree with what I said, and I may have been wrong, but it wasn't hypocritical. If you never said anything of the sort, then fine - I freely admit I was wrong.
When Reagan and Bush chopped upper income tax rates, conservatives didn't wail about redistribution. But try to undo the failures of those policies and the moaning on the right will keep a deaf person awake at night.
Just look at the top marginal tax rate and the total debt as % GDP. They are strikingly inverse to each other.
We need more incentives and tax breaks for small businesses. If we really wanted to support small business in this country, we'd give the same types of breaks the corporations receive.
If you want to call that "redistribution" so be it.
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.
That's the point. SF is worth more but not through any actual industry other than the people around it which means people who are wealthy from rising land prices are leaches. If the government allows me exclusive rights to the best land, its a monopoly. That is what monopolistic advantages are.
