Hacker News Reader

Comment by Spivak | Hacker News Reader

> the real question is where are all those free market Republicans

Blocking public services that naturally have a pricing advantage over private businesses because they're supported by tax dollars. Like if you're gonna drag Republicans for not living up to their free market ideals this really isn't what you should point to.

People said the same thing when they opposed the public option in the '00's and the rationale was the same. "Competing" with government services is just roundabout price controls. I'm zero percent opposed to such things when the market fails to sort itself out but I can see why strict free market adherents wouldn't be on board.

View on HN

ISPs and Pharma companies get subsidies from the government, I don't think your argument holds up here. Just another area that Republicans are happy to be hypocrites on. I would love to see Republicans set out "small government" legislation that removes subsidies to the core businesses in their states but you and I both know that will never happen. A child getting food stamps is an example of our 'welfare state' but it's never the billions that go to agriculture or pharma companies.

I laugh often knowing that WalMart is the largest single recipient of "corporate welfare" in this fine state/country. What a term/fact. When my black nephew started working there, they walked him through "applying for foodstamps" as part of his training/onboarding.

>Blocking public services that naturally have a pricing advantage over private businesses because they're supported by tax dollars.

That's the stated rationale. The actual reason is that the entirety of Republican economic ideology revolves around the idea that the government isn't capable of providing better service than private companies and municipal broadband shows this to be a complete lie.

Well, firstly, we should acknowledge that municipal broadband isn't a story of completely unmitigated success - there are cases of tremendous failure as well.

I'm also fairly sure that most Republicans would not mind if municipal broadband were run - and competed on - commercial terms.

However, if it's funded by municipal bonds that are backed by general obligation (i.e. all taxpayers subsidize, whether they use the service or not) then that seems obviously a problem to me. Even if they're revenue bonds, they're still implicitly subsidized by tax treatment.

The real trick is them being able to claim that with a straight face and then turn around and give subsidies and handouts to the private services.

I have always been terrible at the [empathy-lacking] trick.

Oh'shucks, meself. /s

They weren't using tax dollars. The service is paid for by the bills, its simply not for profit, it just treats the fiber lines like roads and side walks, a common public good. You can even choose your own ISP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com