3 ms·
Looking at the wiki, looks like the government failed to start a bridge or tunnel for over 100 years so is it wrong that an individual risked millions of his o
by PaywallBuster 3y ago
Looking at the wiki, looks like the government failed to start a bridge or tunnel for over 100 years
so is it wrong that an individual risked millions of his own money for a "public service" ?
> ... construction of a tunnel under the river ... Construction started in 1871 and continued until ventilating equipment failed the next year; work was soon abandoned
- arp242 3y ago> so is it wrong that an individual risked millions of his own money for a "public service" ? No, nothing wrong with that. The problem is when that person tries to stop any "competition" (e.g. a new bridge). Infrastructure like roads and bridges aren't "just" a business, they're needed for basic economics and trade to function. "We invested in this bridge a 100 years ago so now no one can build a new bridge in the general area until the end of times" is nothing short of delusional. When people complain about "capitalism" what they usually mean isn't the basic concept, but this kind of hyper-narcissistic money-grabbing wankery.
- PaywallBuster 3y agonothing wrong with protecting one's investments its kind of the government's fault for having many ways it can be "corrupted" or that politics are inefficient and too slow to move (having a new bridge approved and built) Canada managed to go through with it