No government required

[bripat9643]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

You have some evidence that the Army Corp of Engineers built bridges for private railroads?

Please post it.

I'm pretty dogmatic about facts.

That project only happened due to Government financing; just like the Moon landing.

Right, and the taxpayers were looted as a result. Many criminals went to prison because of all the fraud involved in building the government subsidized transcontinentals.

 

[danielpalos]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia

Heavy government subsidies and oversight

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

 

[danielpalos]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

You have some evidence that the Army Corp of Engineers built bridges for private railroads?

Please post it.

I'm pretty dogmatic about facts.

That project only happened due to Government financing; just like the Moon landing.

Right, and the taxpayers were looted as a result. Many criminals went to prison because of all the fraud involved in building the government subsidized transcontinentals.

Did Jesus the Christ, merely waste His time, concerning morals.

 

[bripat9643]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia

Heavy government subsidies and oversight

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

 

[danielpalos]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia

Heavy government subsidies and oversight

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

with government assistance.

To allow the companies to raise additional capital, Congress granted the railroads a 400-foot (120 m) right-of-way corridor, lands for additional facilities like sidings and maintenance yards. They were also granted alternate sections of government-owned lands—6,400 acres (2,600 ha) per mile (1.6 km)—for 10 miles (16 km) on both sides of the track, forming a checkerboard pattern. The railroad companies were given the odd-numbered sections while the federal government retained the even-numbered sections.

 

[bripat9643]

Private railroads built railroad bridges, moron, not the Army Corp of Engineers. You don't know what the **** you're talking about, as usual.

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia

Heavy government subsidies and oversight

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

with government assistance.

To allow the companies to raise additional capital, Congress granted the railroads a 400-foot (120 m) right-of-way corridor, lands for additional facilities like sidings and maintenance yards. They were also granted alternate sections of government-owned lands—6,400 acres (2,600 ha) per mile (1.6 km)—for 10 miles (16 km) on both sides of the track, forming a checkerboard pattern. The railroad companies were given the odd-numbered sections while the federal government retained the even-numbered sections.

Nope. Hill's railroad received no such subsidies, moron. What part of "it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime" didn't you understand?

 

[danielpalos]

Wow. I get it now.

You have no clue and base your philosophy on dogmatic ideology ... in place of facts.

What a shock

First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia

Heavy government subsidies and oversight

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

with government assistance.

To allow the companies to raise additional capital, Congress granted the railroads a 400-foot (120 m) right-of-way corridor, lands for additional facilities like sidings and maintenance yards. They were also granted alternate sections of government-owned lands—6,400 acres (2,600 ha) per mile (1.6 km)—for 10 miles (16 km) on both sides of the track, forming a checkerboard pattern. The railroad companies were given the odd-numbered sections while the federal government retained the even-numbered sections.

Nope. Hill's railroad received no such subsidies, moron. What part of "it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime" didn't you understand?

Hey, you got this one right; it must have been one of those, twice a day moments. Congratulations. It seemed like one of his previous railroads may have, but no need to quibble on this one.

 

[P@triot]

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Only Danny boy could come in after Bripat had filled this thread with facts and declare something that stupid.

 

[Oddball]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.

In July, Microsoft announced a “Rural Airband Initiative” to invest in partnerships with telecommunications companies to bring broadband connectivity to 2 million more people in rural America by 2022.

Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

Microsoft’s Plan to Expand Broadband Would Benefit Rural Americans

I've come to the conclusion that gubmint isn't even needed for that much....And even if they are, they'll NEVER EVER remained constrained by any "checks and balances" or any other rules written up by mere men.

Too many have fallen under the hypnotic spell that says we'd be lost without a band of elite rulers looting and killing us.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, we all know the government subsidized two transcontinental railroads, but dumbasses like you are ignorant of the fact that they were total disasters. They were cesspools of corruption, and all the participating railroads went bankrupt. Ever heard of the Credit Mobilier scandal? The government never subsidized another railroad after that.

Crédit Mobilier of America scandal - Wikipedia

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Private capital recognized that the realization of the objectives and economic projections of this proposed model were impossible. There simply was not a foreseeable demand for freight or passenger service capable of generating sufficient revenues. As a result, private investors refused to invest.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

with government assistance.

To allow the companies to raise additional capital, Congress granted the railroads a 400-foot (120 m) right-of-way corridor, lands for additional facilities like sidings and maintenance yards. They were also granted alternate sections of government-owned lands—6,400 acres (2,600 ha) per mile (1.6 km)—for 10 miles (16 km) on both sides of the track, forming a checkerboard pattern. The railroad companies were given the odd-numbered sections while the federal government retained the even-numbered sections.

Nope. Hill's railroad received no such subsidies, moron. What part of "it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime" didn't you understand?

You must be dumber than even a moron; you didn't understand the citation.

The citation refers to the two railroads the federal government subsidized, not the Great Northern. Hill paid for every acre of land his railroad sat on, plus quit a few additional acres on either side of it. That's how he made a profit. After he built the railroad, he sold the land for a much higher price than he paid.

 

[danielpalos]

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

Only Danny boy could come in after Bripat had filled this thread with facts and declare something that stupid.

haha; you got me. good thing there is no gang of women, to make sure i "settle the bet". most of the other railroads did receive land grants.

A case study in how we should not need corporate welfare, with Good capitalists.

 

[danielpalos]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.

In July, Microsoft announced a “Rural Airband Initiative” to invest in partnerships with telecommunications companies to bring broadband connectivity to 2 million more people in rural America by 2022.

Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

Microsoft’s Plan to Expand Broadband Would Benefit Rural Americans

I've come to the conclusion that gubmint isn't even needed for that much....And even if they are, they'll NEVER EVER remained constrained by any "checks and balances" or any other rules written up by mere men.

Too many have fallen under the hypnotic spell that says we'd be lost without a band of elite rulers looting and killing us.

Anarcho-capitalism is only a theory. The private sector is about Profit, not morals, not public goodness, or even public works.

 

[danielpalos]

The Only reason we got that railroad, was due to Government initiative; just like the Space Race and Moon landing.

J.J. Hill built a transcontinental railroad through Montana with no government money, so your claim is obvious horseshit. He didn't go bankrupt either, and it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime.

with government assistance.

To allow the companies to raise additional capital, Congress granted the railroads a 400-foot (120 m) right-of-way corridor, lands for additional facilities like sidings and maintenance yards. They were also granted alternate sections of government-owned lands—6,400 acres (2,600 ha) per mile (1.6 km)—for 10 miles (16 km) on both sides of the track, forming a checkerboard pattern. The railroad companies were given the odd-numbered sections while the federal government retained the even-numbered sections.

Nope. Hill's railroad received no such subsidies, moron. What part of "it didn't cost the taxpayers one dime" didn't you understand?

You must be dumber than even a moron; you didn't understand the citation.

The citation refers to the two railroads the federal government subsidized, not the Great Northern. Hill paid for every acre of land his railroad sat on, plus quit a few additional acres on either side of it. That's how he made a profit. After he built the railroad, he sold the land for a much higher price than he paid.

I assumed on this one; I should have read further, like I started doing, with right wing citations. He posted no citation; I had to search for it. I usually question every Thing, from the right wing.

 

[Oddball]

Anarcho-capitalism is only a theory. The private sector is about Profit, not morals, not public goodness, or even public works.

I'll take a theory over and experiment that has not only failed every time it has been tried, but is also responsible for the gruesome deaths of hundreds of millions and the impoverishment and misery of trillions.

 

[danielpalos]

Anarcho-capitalism is only a theory. The private sector is about Profit, not morals, not public goodness, or even public works.

I'll take a theory over and experiment that has not only failed every time it has been tried, but is also responsible for the gruesome deaths of hundreds of millions and the impoverishment and misery of trillions.

View attachment 219286

The socialism expressed in our federal Constitution is over two hundred years old. The socialism of Roman government lasted, millennia.

 

[Oddball]

Anarcho-capitalism is only a theory. The private sector is about Profit, not morals, not public goodness, or even public works.

I'll take a theory over and experiment that has not only failed every time it has been tried, but is also responsible for the gruesome deaths of hundreds of millions and the impoverishment and misery of trillions.

View attachment 219286

The socialism expressed in our federal Constitution is over two hundred years old. The socialism of Roman government lasted, millennia.

And what's their condition today?

I rest my case.

 

[danielpalos]

Anarcho-capitalism is only a theory. The private sector is about Profit, not morals, not public goodness, or even public works.

I'll take a theory over and experiment that has not only failed every time it has been tried, but is also responsible for the gruesome deaths of hundreds of millions and the impoverishment and misery of trillions.

View attachment 219286

The socialism expressed in our federal Constitution is over two hundred years old. The socialism of Roman government lasted, millennia.

And what's their condition today?

I rest my case.

What is Capitalism's condition, since 1929?

 

[danielpalos]

on a side note:

would Gettysburg have happened the way it did,

if;

Lee had been more diligent?

When he was looking for the best path for one of his tracks to take, he went on horseback and scouted it personally.

 

[Oddball]

What is Capitalism's condition, since 1929?

You can't bust on something that isn't being tried...There has been no laissez-faire capitalism in play for at least a century....It did, however, bring America from abject poverty to being the world's per-eminent economic superpower in the less than the span of a century.

The economic model in play since the Wilson administration has been a slow steady march toward Keynesian fascism/socialism.

 

[danielpalos]

What is Capitalism's condition, since 1929?

You can't bust on something that isn't being tried...There has been no laissez-faire capitalism in play for at least a century....It did, however, bring America from abject poverty to being the world's per-eminent economic superpower in the less than the span of a century.

The economic model in play since the Wilson administration has been a slow steady march toward Keynesian fascism/socialism.

View attachment 219292

not sure what you mean;

Capitalism "died in 1929", and Socialism has been bailing out Capitalism, ever since.

Anarcho-capitalism is mostly just theory.

Where is the market for "off the shelf new cities from China"; by purchasing financial instruments that generate a positive multiplier effect that support any given Capital venture?