3 ms·

> The goal should be to eliminate government created markets not get "better" at creating them... So we're all going to individually contract with "General Jim

> The goal should be to eliminate government created markets not get "better" at creating them... So we're all going to individually contract with "General Jim's Defense Systems" or "Admiral Bob’s Global Security" ala Snow Crash? The parent is discussing natural monopsonies, where there's no reason for a given territory to have more than one purchaser, such as national security space launches and social security distribution systems.

syshum 9y ago
But we do already have more than one Company for "National Security Space launches" (ULA and SpaceX) with more attempting to become contractors. We have seen directly in that market what competition will do, massively lower costs. ULA is somewhere on the order for 5x more expensive than SpaceX, and SpaceX had to sue to get the privilege of bidding on the contracts for the Defense Dept which previously did No-Bid contracts to ULA So your own example debunks your comment Further I never stated we could eliminate ALL government markets, but that should be the GOAL, national defense is likely one that can not be eliminated however it is also an example of the extreme waste and over reach these markets create where now the government has programs that even the military says they do not want because they are Jobs programs not for actual defense.
- leereeves 9y ago
  I think you might be mixing up monopolies (only one seller) and monopsonies (only one buyer).
  - dalbasal 9y ago
    Yes, at least that is what I meant by monopsony. There are multiple competing firms, but they all sell primarily to the state. The legal cases syshum mentions resolved in changing the rules of this artificial, state-run market. ..making them better. I don't know where "no-bid" plays into the story, but elon musk testified for fixed-bid as an alternative to cost-plus pricing/bidding.

syshum 9y ago

But we do already have more than one Company for "National Security Space launches" (ULA and SpaceX) with more attempting to become contractors. We have seen directly in that market what competition will do, massively lower costs. ULA is somewhere on the order for 5x more expensive than SpaceX, and SpaceX had to sue to get the privilege of bidding on the contracts for the Defense Dept which previously did No-Bid contracts to ULA So your own example debunks your comment Further I never stated we could eliminate ALL government markets, but that should be the GOAL, national defense is likely one that can not be eliminated however it is also an example of the extreme waste and over reach these markets create where now the government has programs that even the military says they do not want because they are Jobs programs not for actual defense.

leereeves 9y ago
I think you might be mixing up monopolies (only one seller) and monopsonies (only one buyer).
- dalbasal 9y ago
  Yes, at least that is what I meant by monopsony. There are multiple competing firms, but they all sell primarily to the state. The legal cases syshum mentions resolved in changing the rules of this artificial, state-run market. ..making them better. I don't know where "no-bid" plays into the story, but elon musk testified for fixed-bid as an alternative to cost-plus pricing/bidding.