Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thackney
There is a significant difference in building out original infrastructure, compared to using tax payer dollars to fund the next competing service.

For me, the definitions of "original infrastructure" and "the next competing service" that may help explain where I'm coming from. The "original infrastructure" in the place now called the USA was fire, candles, forests, water, land and the minerals on or beneath them. Then came whale oil and horse trails.

Several hundred years later came the industrial revolution that sparked the "the next competing service", the wonderful new discoveries/inventions of electricity, oil and natural gas that eventually resulted in power being delivered to our homes throughout the mainly rural USA through copper cables and steel pipelines. Some of this infrastructure was funded privately but much of it was subsidized by various combinations of private AND public sources. The actual mining of the natural fuel resources was/is operated mainly by private enterprise but some, such as coal, water, nuclear, oil and NatGas are either closely regulated by government agencies or come from land owned outright by government. All of this has been happening over another couple hundred years of development and is still happening via new technological advancements of so-called "green energy" sources -- all of it funded in some manner by various government agencies. We are still in "the next competing service". Much of "the next competing service" is deteriorated and due for a "next competing service v2" which will need much more government funding and regulation to accomplish.

NatGas as a transportation fuel is a relatively new development in the USA; why is it not subsidized just as the government subsidizes power infrastructure that comes from the electric wall plugs and NatGas lines in our homes and businesses and the rail and highway transportation infrastructure?

29 posted on 05/20/2015 3:12:49 PM PDT by shove_it (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen -- Dennis Prager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: shove_it
just as the government subsidizes power infrastructure that comes from the electric wall plugs

Government does not nor should subsidize power infrastructure. The users of the electricity pay the full cost, not tax payers in other areas. What the government did do in electrical power was require every customer be served, guarantee a profit and restrict competition. The government regulates what can be charged. But if you don't use electricity in that area, you don't pay for electricity in that area.

Natural Gas Distribution is done the same. Natural Gas Transmission lines do not have even this protection.

30 posted on 05/21/2015 5:16:22 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson