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