Even more people have trouble understanding that extremities of capitalism or socialism are just as insidious to society and a threat to freedom.

Agreed, but I think it can be a slippery slope sliding to either side of the extreme.

Personally, if the American Government had proven itself to be an organized, well-run, model of efficiency, than it wouldn't bother me as much to watch the direction we are moving in. The problem is that far too many times then few, the Government relationships are far too cozy with the companies they are supposed to be regulating. It's not too uncommon to see major CEO's take a seat on a governmental advisory board overseeing the industry that they are employed in. This is NOT to say that an all out assault on "Big Business" is the answer by any means, I prefer direct that focus on the corruption down in Washington because that is where the problem lies.

Until our government starts acknowledging political corruption as an extreme, toxic, credible threat on the same level as treason, we will be better off, in my opinion, with a capitalistic system that allows the mechanisms and rules of the marketplace take their turn.

You are much better at the multi-quote than I am

I'll ask one simple question:
If the passenger rail system is not ready for privatization, then when will it be?

My argument here is that, yes McDonald's makes alot of money, but it's not by any means the healthiest food options, however McDonald's has been extremely successful because people (the market) consider it as one of their best options.

Perhaps aviation isn't the "Best" option available for transportation, but it is the "Preferred" method of transportation in this company.
Looking at it objectively, forgetting the government, if a transportation company were to attempt to bring back horse-drawn carriages, would that be considered the "Best" option?
It would be by far one of the cleanest forms of transportation, but it would more than likely be a dismal failure.

The market place doesn't want to be transported around on horse-drawn carriages anymore than they want to be transported around on high-speed trains.
That is the reality, and any company trying to shove a product down a consumers throat with a uncompetitive price, will find failure around every corner, our government included.

Let's say we spend billions of stimulus dollars to build these high-speed rails, and then they fail to bring as much revenue as they had hoped, who fits the bill for that loss??

Our government has a bad habit of spending money first and asking questions/doing research second.

Point in case, the TSA's purchased of a few thousand backscatter ATI machines. Politicians we so quick to implement these new devices that they never bothered to field test or research if people would be willing to use the devices. Now these machines just sit there and collect dust most of the time. I can't even fathom what a loss that came to taxpaying Americans.

Define extremities of capitalism. To me an extremity of capitalism is when the wealthy make so much money their kids become limosine liberals ala the kennedys, to you I am sure it is something else.

Capitalism is the natural result of freedom. It doesnt have to be imposed or empowered with a gun like your other isms.

A lot of that is actually paid for by excise taxes, which airlines bear the brunt of. But in any case aviation infrastructure is a HUGE economic enabler...that's something that really does need to be funded. If you build, they will come...if you don't build it they might come anyway, but they might not.

I would argue that it is optimal for government to manage aviation infrastructure but not an financial necessity. The industry would fund it's own infrastructure if government stopped, but ticket prices would go way up. Fewer people would be able to afford to fly as frequently, and all the taxpayers who saved a dime on infrastructure costs would probably lose a dollar due to the damage to the overall economy caused by a shrunken and proprietary aviation system.

Amtrack and other rail systems would be out of business without subsidies, this is a pretty clear financial fact.


Very true, and necessary. Government can take the big picture and long-term views which can be very important for long-term infrastructure planning and development. Industry in most cases can do neither.

While we can debate (not on APC) the ideal size and scope of government, some things in an industrial society do actually work best with government oversight.

Update: Looks like the trains may not survive the current budgetary cage-fight...

U.S. high-speed rail program hit by deep budget cuts - CNN.com

Oh Darn.

The most amusing part of this story is that some of us still think it is fine to let a bunch of yo-yos continue to build castles in the sky with money they don't have.

The one thing they have actually built is a massive debt for all of us. That is their monument.

The only skill any of them have displayed is a great sense of how to seperate us from our property.