Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!laura From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Doing only that which brings the most profit. Message-ID: <4226@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Fri, 17-Aug-84 04:31:32 EDT Article-I.D.: utzoo.4226 Posted: Fri Aug 17 04:31:32 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 17-Aug-84 04:31:32 EDT References: <740@ubc-ean.CDN> <1050@dciem.UUCP>, <999@hcrvax.UUCP>, <8680@watmath.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 28 If you are valuable enough to XYZ corp then they will run a line to your farm. they might even give you a leased line. But even if they do not then the telephone company is likely to already run a line to your farm. The telephone is a much more valuable instrument if you can reach everybody with one. And the telephone companies can finance their own way through long distance charges. But suppose they couldn't. Suppose it was the case that the only way that they could be financed was through tax subsidies. Consider that there are always alternative ways in which one could do something. It may not have all the features that one would like, but if it is substantially cheaper then people will use it anyway. it is not that they do not appreciate the features of the other service, but that they do not think that it is worth the cost. Right now, for instance, trucking is a cheap way to transport goods. However, it is only cheap in that the trucks, which do the most damage to the roads do not have to pay the most to repair and construct them. They are the recipients of an invisible subsidy. Before you all rush out and say that this is nice because cheap trucking is a good thing, consider the whole question from the point of view of the rail companies who are adamant in insisting that if they received the sort of money that the truck industry and the airplane industry received they could provide much cheaper service than either. laura creighton utzoo!laura