3 ms·
I use the Fire service as an example. This is something that always works massively better as a tax-funded government service rather than a market-driven servic
by marcus_holmes 3y ago
I use the Fire service as an example. This is something that always works massively better as a tax-funded government service rather than a market-driven service. The thought of 3 different fire trucks turning up to your burning house and then pitching for your business, or refusing to save your burning house because you didn't pay for some optional add-on, or only saving your burning house but not rescuing your pets because of some contract clause, is horrifying [0].
And obviously, if there are some things that are better delivered as tax-funded government-provided services, there are others. Where you draw that line is arguable. But it's definitely not at "markets are universally better for everything". Because Fire Service.
[0] and outside the USA, we think like this about healthcare too, but it's less obviously simple and straightforward.
- oatmeal1 3y agoIf 3 different companies showed up to put out the fire, you'd get a fair deal for the cost of putting out the fire, because they'd have to bid against one-another, but I take your point otherwise.
- marcus_holmes 3y agoBut that's the point, really. If my house is on fire, what I want is a single fire truck to turn up as soon as possible and do whatever it takes to save as much of my stuff (without endangering anyone) as possible. Three fire trucks is unnecessary (and inefficient). Wasting time arguing about pricing is counter-productive. If all my stuff is burning then it's reasonable to assume that any savings I might get from a better price is going to be outweighed by the extra damage done in the time it takes to agree the price.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- fdschoeneman 3y agoDid Andreesson argue that fire services should be privatized in his manifesto? Damn. Now I must read it immediately.
- marcus_holmes 3y agoHe said "markets are better for everything". So yes.
- fdschoeneman 3y agoI just searched Andreesson's manifesto and I cannot find the phrase you are attributing to him.
- marcus_holmes 3y agoThere's a whole section entitled Markets that you obviously missed: "We believe free markets are the most effective way to organize a technological economy." - is what I'm paraphrasing, and the first sentence in that section. but there's more: "Markets prevent monopolies and cartels." - provably wrong. Anti-trust regulations are needed to interfere in markets to prevent monopolies and cartels. "We believe markets are an inherently individualistic way to achieve superior collective outcomes." - see Fire Service for counter-argument "We believe there is no conflict between capitalist profits and a social welfare system that protects the vulnerable. " - laughably wrong in the face of US healthcare vs everywhere else in the world "We believe central economic planning elevates the worst of us and drags everyone down; markets exploit the best of us to benefit all of us." - again, Fire Service
- chaps 3y ago(FYI: you're arguing with someone who, four minutes before the post you responded to, admitted they've not actually read it.)
- marcus_holmes 3y agohaha, fair point. It's worth reading, I think. It's a coherent point of view. I agree with a lot of it. Just not the "trickle-down economics" version of market-driven capitalism that he supports.
- 3y ago