[ExI] vaccines again

William Flynn Wallace foozler83 at gmail.com
Wed Jan 4 22:04:15 UTC 2023

On the theme of 'private enterprise will do things better than government
will', why not turn over public transportation to private owners?  Maybe
people don't think it will make any money.  bill w

On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 3:46 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> ...> On Behalf Of John Klos via extropy-chat
> >...So do you wish us to suspend our disbelief...
> Sure go ahead.  Disbelief isn't necessary in this case.
> >...and simply imagine that capitalism == good, government == bad...
> Capitalism and government can both be good.  Government should not compete
> against capital.  It isn't authorized to do that.
> >...and therefore high speed rail is bad because capitalism in the US
> couldn't make it work?
> >...(that's a yes or no question)...
> John your question fails to deal with nuance, which makes it naïve and
> oversimplified, for it isn't a yes or no question.  The answer is that high
> speed rail is neither good nor bad.  In this case it isn't needed.  There
> are existing sufficient means in place to make that run.  This doesn't make
> high speed rail either good or bad.
> >...The third option is that we tire of pointing out obvious flaws and
> simply let you say what you want to say, and just silently pretend to
> agree,
> much like parents do sometimes with kids. Should we do this?
> If you wish.
> >...Do you address your desire to have us believe oversimplified
> assertions,
> or do you make nonsensical statements like, "That's the only level that
> matters: people with capital to invest" and go off on a tangent again?
> People with capital make things happen.  Government is here to support
> them,
> not compete against them.
> >...If we REALLY want to have a proper discourse where we take the time to
> understand each other, then we shouldn't be so willing to dismiss OURSELVES
> to try to make points...
> OK.
> >...You completely dismiss yourself here: The only level of understanding
> of
> capitalism that matters is: "people with capital to invest"? That doesn't
> even make sense...
> It does to me.  People with capital are those who understand business.
> They
> collectively chose to not invest in high speed rail, because they
> collectively felt it wouldn't pay.  I think they were right.
> >...This is a risk to other passengers? You actually forsee the issue of
> homeless people on high speed rail being a big problem?...
> I do.  Both SF and Los Angeles are huge homeless areas.  It is easily
> foreseen some would get aboard with a backpack full of food, then kite back
> and forth until that food was exhausted.  Everyone must be somewhere.
> >...These are wildly disconnected things. It makes me wonder if you've
> never
> been on a commuter rail line where tickets are checked...
> BART doesn't work that way.  High speed rail might use a ticket check
> system.
> >>... As an unapologetic capitalist, I don't see the need for high speed
> > rail and would not invest in it.
> >...Right, but the people want it...
> OK so start a company, sell the stock, raise 100 billion dollars, build it.
> The people don't all want it.  The people along the Interstate 5 corridor
> don't want it: they will lose customers.  The environmentalists don't want
> it because it cuts migration routes.  The NIMBYs don't want it because,
> well, NIMBYs don't want anything.  Some people want it, but what we should
> be doing now is putting it on the ballot with the remaining price tag.
> >...You can like that the billionaires get richer all the time, and that
> things that reduce their wealth collecting are bad, but others aren't
> necessarily going to agree. We can even discuss that! But why can't we
> discuss that without silly assertions?... John
> OK.  I assert that billionaire's spending their money on these kinds of
> projects is a good thing.  But billionaires didn't.  They are crazy rich
> for
> a reason: they see what is likely to make money and what isn't.  I struggle
> to see how high speed rail can compete.  That looks like a huge money loser
> to me, and the vote to approve it was a bait and switch.  Notice the price
> tag doubled soon after Prop 1A passed.  So where's the do over?
> Regarding do-overs, the people view public transit differently now than
> before the pandemic.  We now see that public transit is a disease vector,
> and we see that there are good alternatives to moving humans.  In many
> cases, more work can be done faster, safter, cheaper using communication
> rather than transportation.
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230104/fec71d75/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list