dagrimreefah wrote:Robben_DuMarsch wrote:It's a good idea in theory, but wifi everywhere is too expensive.
It would be better not to subsidize anything at all. Its not a good idea at all, in theory or otherwise.
If nothing were subsidized, and everyone acted in their best interest, farmers would only grow cash crops. Infrastructure would be slow to develop in areas ripe to prosper, resulting in slower economic growth and a less efficient a response to population shifts. There would be less mass transit, which provides an overall more economical alternative to individual transportation.
Not everything should be subsidized, but certain things should be subsidized because the total benefit outweighs the costs, and there is no private sector equivalent that would occupy the subsidized sector. A "free market" operates under the fallacy that individual greed drives only to create the most efficient system. This isn't true, as is evidenced by monopolies, pre-subsidized agriculture, ponzi-schemes. Unless you argue that creation of regulation by the Government is actually a
function of the free market, then I agree.