View Single Post
Old 05-17-2023, 05:46 AM   #396
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,939
Thanks: 1,152
Thanked 1,959 Times in 1,210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffk View Post
An argument in the absurd.

There are obviously some essential services that government must provide. Road management, fire and police protection, etc. A swimming pool and gym are NOT essential services.

Also note that even within the essential services, things like roads, the construction is done by private companies. That is because government is spectacularly BAD at providing business services, especially when dealing with costs, management, quality control, honesty and accountability, etc. Further, WHEN have you seen government projections of cost be accurate? Actual costs greatly exceed government estimates, either due to incompetence or dishonestly. Generally, the less the government gets involved with issues, the better the outcome. Private companies that can't manage their business properly go out of business. Government just stumbles on to make another mess; there is low/no accountability.

Also note that voters that think they can vote themselves whatever they want are foolish. The economic constraints on what a community can afford are not subject to a vote. The unique conditions of each community determine its ability to generate income and money spent on one thing preclude it being spent on something else. It's not unlike the household where the husband wants a new BMW, the wife a new house, the child a pony, and none of those things are affordable or practical for their finances. They might find a bank that will loan them money but they will struggle to pay their bills and other, more essential things that come up may not be possible to do.
While I agree that government isn't always efficient, I see that as the price for equality.

As history has shown—through firefighting and policing organizations, education, information access, policy, etc.—private industry will always cater to those with money and disregard those without.

So, there is certainly a case to be made for establishments that benefit the public to be instituted and managed by the government, but the decision always pivots on collective value vs. cost.

It is hard for me to see a collective value to the whole of Moultonborough taxpayers, a sizable portion of which won't even be in the area half the year.

In fact, knowing how my local Y works in regards to pool access—which is barely available after local sports teams, other organizations, and restricted (cleaning/maintenance) times—I'm still not even sure what this place would be good for.

Sent from my SM-G990U1 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline