6 ms·

The problem with having an expansive public sector is that it never stops expanding and has an extremely strong tendency of becoming unequal, disconnected or or

The problem with having an expansive public sector is that it never stops expanding and has an extremely strong tendency of becoming unequal, disconnected or or one-size-fits-all as the scope/complexity of the programs expand. This is particularly the case when our electoral choices at many a level boil down to binary options that may not project well for individuals with values/views that are largely orthogonal to the options practically available. For example if I were pro ABCDEFG, and one candidate is Anti ABC, and the other anti EFG; Which one should I choose when taken together the value of one set over the other is subjective and not even ordinal? One mustn't forget that the power to do great good is inherently also the power to do great harm intentionally or not.

mushbino 6y ago
Competition is great for consumers. The government should be allowed to compete along with the private sector. The winners of this scenario are the citizens and the people who work for these companies. I've seen exactly this scenario play out in Santa Cruz. Comcast had a virtual monopoly. Even as recently as about 5 years ago one of the best internet packages was up to 20mbps (4mbps in reality) for $40/month. The city announced a partnership with Cruzio for municipal broadband and virtually overnight Comcast started offering 200mbps for $50/month. Today you can get around 400mbps for $55/month. We should do the exact same thing with healthcare (public option).
- andromeduck 6y ago
  I generally agree at a local/municipal scale but that generally doesn't scale well and is often relatively unstable if it is not operated as an mostly isolated entity given the strong conflict of interest of officials involved easily and often leads to regulating private industry out of existence.
  - mushbino 6y ago
    Where do you see that being the case with broadband? There are many examples of private sector monopolies, but I've never heard of private sector broadband being regulated out of existence.
    - andromeduck 6y ago
      For telco stuff specifically it's more that local governments love to rentseek from the incumbents. The faustian bargain is that the telcos pony up and in exchange the government, usually local, makes it nearly impossible for new players to enter. Some of those policies might end up making it harder for them to operate but it's harder still for competitors. The same is true when hospital networks try to expand beyond state lines. The reasoning goes if I can't expand why should they?

mushbino 6y ago

Competition is great for consumers. The government should be allowed to compete along with the private sector. The winners of this scenario are the citizens and the people who work for these companies. I've seen exactly this scenario play out in Santa Cruz. Comcast had a virtual monopoly. Even as recently as about 5 years ago one of the best internet packages was up to 20mbps (4mbps in reality) for $40/month. The city announced a partnership with Cruzio for municipal broadband and virtually overnight Comcast started offering 200mbps for $50/month. Today you can get around 400mbps for $55/month. We should do the exact same thing with healthcare (public option).

andromeduck 6y ago
I generally agree at a local/municipal scale but that generally doesn't scale well and is often relatively unstable if it is not operated as an mostly isolated entity given the strong conflict of interest of officials involved easily and often leads to regulating private industry out of existence.
- mushbino 6y ago
  Where do you see that being the case with broadband? There are many examples of private sector monopolies, but I've never heard of private sector broadband being regulated out of existence.
  - andromeduck 6y ago
    For telco stuff specifically it's more that local governments love to rentseek from the incumbents. The faustian bargain is that the telcos pony up and in exchange the government, usually local, makes it nearly impossible for new players to enter. Some of those policies might end up making it harder for them to operate but it's harder still for competitors. The same is true when hospital networks try to expand beyond state lines. The reasoning goes if I can't expand why should they?