> I consider myself a relatively gung-ho free-market type I'm skeptical. > A free-market dynamic requires an actual market. Not really. A free-market type wo

> I consider myself a relatively gung-ho free-market type I'm skeptical. > A free-market dynamic requires an actual market. Not really. A free-market type would say the supply is limited. Even if the supply is zero it's still a free-market if the actors are trading voluntarily. The supply for many markets is zero, but it typically correlates with demand. > The entire purpose of infrastructure is to generate positive externalities A free-market type would probably use the word value rather than positive externalities. But isn't the purpose of any action to create positive value? Your argument is essentially that forced trades via central planning can create more value than voluntary trades. > 3. There are broader socio-economic issues of accessibility to services that profit-driven companies have no incentive to be responsive to. A free-market type would probably say that the supply of accessibility services is low due to limited demand / profitability. While true maybe this is where charity plays a role.