Fiscal Cliff MEGATHREAD: Wile E. Economy falls off, lands in cloud at bottom

[Berkut]

They already  are.

Yes, but Ide is so desperate to sound like a radical that he declares that it is "currently considered... outrageous" that government should "fight wars" and "upgrade ... infrastructure." 

What he and Meri don't understand, because they don't understand how government works, is that it would be a disaster to have the government build the solar power satellites and wind farms.  Doing so would suck out of the economy money and incentive needed to create satellites and wind farms that actually worked and were efficient.  The USSR and Mao's China should have provided all the necessary evidence that we don't want government to do anything that it does not have to do, but some people aren't interested in evidence, it seems.

Thanks Ron Paul.  Who knew that national parks were the road to Stalinism?

Ever heard of Katyn Forest? 

God, I do enjoy the occasional reminder of why the ignore function is so great.

[Razgovory]

I thought we disabled the Ignore function.

[grumbler]

Would current corporations be capable of coming up with the equivalent of the 50s/60s interstate network ?

Sure.  In Virginia, a private corporation has built a $2 billion bypass for the DC beltway.  It's a toll road, and the corporation has a 75-year concession (for which they financed the road and pay 10-30%  - depending on the total revenue - to the state).

The privately-financed lanes are indistinguishable from the publicly-funded lanes they parallel, other than being less crowded.

A larger version of this would require a bigger investment, but that seems entirely possible so long as ROI is good.

[Berkut]

Would current corporations be capable of coming up with the equivalent of the 50s/60s interstate network ?

Sure.  In Virginia, a private corporation has built a $2 billion bypass for the DC beltway.  It's a toll road, and the corporation has a 75-year concession (for which they financed the road and pay 10-30%  - depending on the total revenue - to the state).

The privately-financed lanes are indistinguishable from the publicly-funded lanes they parallel, other than being less crowded.

A larger version of this would require a bigger investment, but that seems entirely possible so long as ROI is good.

Not sure I am convinced that something of the scale of the national interstate system would result from strictly private investment, simply because it is unlikely that the ROI would be that good.

I don't have any problem with the feds doing stuff like the interstate system. I think that went pretty damn well.

On the other hand, it also seems to me like that US interstate system is almost "as good as it gets" as far as government programs. Overall, the outcome was pretty good - but I don't know that it is a typical outcome of large, federal programs.

And it certainly has it's own set of issues that are typical of state solutions.

[grumbler]

That seems fair. To my mind, what needs to happen isn't that the goverment actually do the building, but I do believe in continued and increased government funding of private businesses in this regard.

The government is notoriously bad at picking the winners in economic competitions.  See Solyndra Corporation, A123 Systems, etc.

The government has a role in providing infrastructure and establishing standards, for sure, but I think anyone arguing for subsidizing individual corporations, even if they do things the arguer likes, is mad.

[Neil]

Those are toll roads, which are an abomination.

[grumbler]

Not sure I am convinced that something of the scale of the national interstate system would result from strictly private investment, simply because it is unlikely that the ROI would be that good.

I don't have any problem with the feds doing stuff like the interstate system. I think that went pretty damn well.

On the other hand, it also seems to me like that US interstate system is almost "as good as it gets" as far as government programs. Overall, the outcome was pretty good - but I don't know that it is a typical outcome of large, federal programs.

And it certainly has it's own set of issues that are typical of state solutions.

I think the ROI would, in fact, be quite good if the interstate system had been built with private funds and was all toll-based.  I am not sure that would be a good thing for the country, though.  It would make interstate commerce much more expensive, and thus reduce the impact of relative advantage, which, as we all know from our Adam Smith, is a bad thing.

The question was whether it would be possible, not whether it would be a good thing.

[Razgovory]

Those are toll roads, which are an abomination.

You are interrupting their libertarian circle jerk.

[Sheilbh]

Those are toll roads, which are an abomination.

You are interrupting their libertarian circle jerk.

I don't mind toll roads. They needn't necessarily be libertarian. The French ones are mostly built and operated by private companies (I think the government tends to retain a share of costs and profits).

I love a bit of dirigiste public-private infrastructure myself

[Admiral Yi]

I think its pretty easy to come up with a utilitarian argument against economic inequality if one makes somewhat plausible assumptions about satiation and the shape of an income-utility or wealth-utility curve.

Partially conceded, but you are using a static model.

After consideration, utilitarian doesn't work, but efficiency does.

[merithyn]

That seems fair. To my mind, what needs to happen isn't that the goverment actually do the building, but I do believe in continued and increased government funding of private businesses in this regard.

The government is notoriously bad at picking the winners in economic competitions.  See Solyndra Corporation, A123 Systems, etc.

The government has a role in providing infrastructure and establishing standards, for sure, but I think anyone arguing for subsidizing individual corporations, even if they do things the arguer likes, is mad.

I was thinking more along the lines of tax incentives and government grants rather than direct supplementation to any particular company.

[Habbaku]

Those are toll roads, which are an abomination.

You are interrupting their libertarian circle jerk.

Someone's pouting again.

[Razgovory]

Those are toll roads, which are an abomination.

You are interrupting their libertarian circle jerk.

Someone's pouting again.

If I didn't say something they would be tossing each other off about the gold standard right now.

[Ideologue]

Yeah, they're both pretty bonkers. 

What wars are we not fighting now that need fighting?

Bombing Uganda till they adopt Lawrence v. Texas.

Intervention in Mexico.

Afghanistan, but now with more air power.

And we'll eventually be faced with an unstable, belligerent PRC or an even more unstable and perhaps more belligerent successor regime.

[Ideologue]

What wars are we not fighting now that need fighting?

I assumed Ide meant actually funding the wars we had to be in instead of cutting taxes at the same time, not starting new ones.

That too, although it may be a day late and a dollar short on Iraq and Afghanistan.  The other ones I suggest are either logistically simple (Mexico), limited (Uganda), or cheap (winning any war really need only cost about $2 billion that we've already spent).

But I'm being a little facetious.  I'm not necessarily advocating any new war, just, if we could trivially do so, those are countries whose situations I'd find of interest were I president.