[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course I have to think of science and I believe that it would suffer greatly if all science were privately run.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

Why? Because you have a feeling? Have you investigated it? Do you really believe that fundamental science has to be funded involuntarily or it won't get done? Personally, I think that is silly. Fundamental science is extremely valuable. I take it you will not disagree? Capital gravitates in a free market to that which is valuable. By what magical mechanism would science not be invested in?

[ QUOTE ]
And what about the interstates? (Sorry, I keep thinking of that quote) What pays for that?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about . . . the people who use them? Unlike now? Where the tax burden for almost all government "services" is either only tenuously connected or completely divorced from those who actually make use of the service?

[ QUOTE ]
Who does the upkeep on any roads?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about . . . the companies that own them?

[ QUOTE ]
Why do they do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

To make money?

[ QUOTE ]
Where does the profit come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. People want to drive on interstate highways (there is a demand).
2. They will pay you if you supply that demand.
3. Profit.

I could go into extensive detail describing a system of privately owned interstate highways, and why they would be far cheaper and better than our current system.

But I warn you, I have had these sorts of discussions on the internet many, many times. They always turn into the same thing: "Ok, but what about X? How does the private sector provide for X? I can't think of how the private sector could provide for X, therefore it can't, and therefore we need government to do it for us." I then patiently explain how the private sector could provide X. "Ok, but what about Y? How does the private sector provide for Y? I can't think of how the private sector could provide for Y . . ."

So, do you want to hear about private interstates or not?