Let's not forget that (speaking of bridges) "we all do it" means we all do it by paying taxes. The businessman that buys low on one side of the river and sells high on the other side gets credit for all he's done building that business, but gets a very tiny share of credit for building the bridge. However, he (his business model) NEEDS the bridge very much.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You Didn't Do It Somebody Else Did
- Thread starter oldtime
- Start date
I completely understand what Obama was trying to say, and he IS being taken out of context. But the ridicule isn't necessarily misplaced in the end. What he is saying is not completely correct, and shows a lack of understanding on how our "system" that he refers to actually came (and comes) into existence.
The first issue is the suggestion that government builds the system and then businesses and entrepreneurs come in and use it. That is actually exactly backwards. This line of thinking suggests that America was built like those vacant business centers in China. As if the government anticipates the need for a bridge or a road, so it builds one and then businesses build around it. It doesn't happen this way at all. The reality is that the commercial buildings and the houses of employees are the driver of the "system". Not the result of it.
If I want to build a new structure, I don't go around searching for a new road that the government has built that is surrounded by available land that they are handing out. I go look for a suitable location for my structure. Then I try to convince the private owner of that land to sell to me. If there is already "system" there that I will be hooking into, then I pay a direct fee (impact fees) to extend that portion of the system to my structure. This is also what all of my neighboring businesses did throughout time. Each time a developer wanted to build somewhere that the system didn't reach to, they were responsible for paying for the expansion to their location. Ask a developer why he can go out and buy acreage for $20K/acre and then sell a 1/4 acre parcel for $70K. He was responsible for the cost of extending the "system" to those lots. Once the system has been expanded, the buyer of those lots is purchasing the land plus the system, from the private developer who already paid for the system expansion in the first place.
Each time a piece of real estate is sold, the new owner pays an increased premium for the expanded system around them. A school, church, and strip mall go into your neighborhood; what happens to your property value? The structure itself is actually depreciating in value over time, as it has a limit useful life before it must be replaced. But the system around it keeps getting more valuable as it expands. So subsequent buyers keep paying more and eventually the value of the system will exceed to value of the structure, to the point where the structure will be torn down and replaced by one that can better take advantage of the expanded system. But all along the way, each new owner pays an increased premium for the system he uses.
If there are no roads to such a location, a couple different things might happen. If it is a private business complex that will not contain through streets, then the developer is completely responsible for the cost. If the developer simply creates through streets that would connect other portions of the road network, then he only pays a portion (frequently 1/2) and the local tax payers come in and foot the rest of the bill because they will be benefiting from a more complete network.
So at this point, not only have the private developers paid for the direct cost of expanding the system to their single location, but also are continually paying for expansion to other areas, as well as higher premiums for the system each time they expand their business.
In the end, the government plays a single roll. They are the planning organization that attempts to zone things out based on intended use. Each incorporated city area has agreed at some point that residential should be located by residential and commercial by commercial. We've appointed city councils to regulate this. We didn't appoint them to build it. Just to make sure that developers don't run amok and create an inefficient network.
The first issue is the suggestion that government builds the system and then businesses and entrepreneurs come in and use it. That is actually exactly backwards. This line of thinking suggests that America was built like those vacant business centers in China. As if the government anticipates the need for a bridge or a road, so it builds one and then businesses build around it. It doesn't happen this way at all. The reality is that the commercial buildings and the houses of employees are the driver of the "system". Not the result of it.
If I want to build a new structure, I don't go around searching for a new road that the government has built that is surrounded by available land that they are handing out. I go look for a suitable location for my structure. Then I try to convince the private owner of that land to sell to me. If there is already "system" there that I will be hooking into, then I pay a direct fee (impact fees) to extend that portion of the system to my structure. This is also what all of my neighboring businesses did throughout time. Each time a developer wanted to build somewhere that the system didn't reach to, they were responsible for paying for the expansion to their location. Ask a developer why he can go out and buy acreage for $20K/acre and then sell a 1/4 acre parcel for $70K. He was responsible for the cost of extending the "system" to those lots. Once the system has been expanded, the buyer of those lots is purchasing the land plus the system, from the private developer who already paid for the system expansion in the first place.
Each time a piece of real estate is sold, the new owner pays an increased premium for the expanded system around them. A school, church, and strip mall go into your neighborhood; what happens to your property value? The structure itself is actually depreciating in value over time, as it has a limit useful life before it must be replaced. But the system around it keeps getting more valuable as it expands. So subsequent buyers keep paying more and eventually the value of the system will exceed to value of the structure, to the point where the structure will be torn down and replaced by one that can better take advantage of the expanded system. But all along the way, each new owner pays an increased premium for the system he uses.
If there are no roads to such a location, a couple different things might happen. If it is a private business complex that will not contain through streets, then the developer is completely responsible for the cost. If the developer simply creates through streets that would connect other portions of the road network, then he only pays a portion (frequently 1/2) and the local tax payers come in and foot the rest of the bill because they will be benefiting from a more complete network.
So at this point, not only have the private developers paid for the direct cost of expanding the system to their single location, but also are continually paying for expansion to other areas, as well as higher premiums for the system each time they expand their business.
In the end, the government plays a single roll. They are the planning organization that attempts to zone things out based on intended use. Each incorporated city area has agreed at some point that residential should be located by residential and commercial by commercial. We've appointed city councils to regulate this. We didn't appoint them to build it. Just to make sure that developers don't run amok and create an inefficient network.
you are exactly wrong. lets just take the gps system. the government built it. businesses figured out ways to utilize it and profit from it.Quote from Epic:
The first issue is the suggestion that government builds the system and then businesses and entrepreneurs come in and use it. That is actually exactly backwards.
Quote from oldtime:
well, yes and no. most towns in the west were built along the rail lines, and if there was ever a fascist success story it would be the railroad
built on free government land to haul people and commodities to communities springing up on land the government took away from the indians to gave away to white people encourage settlement.
Quote from Free Thinker:
you are exactly wrong. lets just take the gps system. the government built it. businesses figured out ways to utilize it and profit from it.
Keep trying. For someone called FreeThinker, you sure need to think things through a bit further before responding. GPS is simply utilization of radio broadcasting that was discovered/developed/paid for by multiple scientists and entrepreneurs over the span of a couple hundred years.
The satellites used are in place mainly because private companies invented and developed rocket propellant over time. They are operated via computers that were invented and developed by mostly private inventors starting in 1822.
Sure, there were some contributions by government groups. But even in those cases, it was paid for by the very people who would be using it.
This is about a 90% misunderstanding of how major technology is actually developed. I'll give you a clue: war.Quote from Epic:
Keep trying. For someone called FreeThinker, you sure need to think things through a bit further before responding. GPS is simply utilization of radio broadcasting that was discovered/developed/paid for by multiple scientists and entrepreneurs over the span of a couple hundred years.
The satellites used are in place mainly because private companies invented and developed rocket propellant over time. They are operated via computers that were invented and developed by mostly private inventors starting in 1822.
Sure, there were some contributions by government groups. But even in those cases, it was paid for by the very people who would be using it.
Quote from oldtime:
well, yes and no. most towns in the west were built along the rail lines, and if there was ever a fascist success story it would be the railroad
Nope. The railroads were built to connect two existing communities, just like a road. Nobody ever went out and said, "If we build a railroad to this location, then people will build a city here!"
First the single line between two locations is justified. Then intermediate points are filled in at an increasing cost to the most recent developer.
Quote from Ricter:
This is about a 90% misunderstanding of how major technology is actually developed. I'll give you a clue: war.
False! Previously invented technology is often assembled into a gadget that will serve a war purpose. But it is rarely the government that invented the core tech.
Quote from Epic:
Nope. The railroads were built to connect two existing communities, just like a road. Nobody ever went out and said, "If we build a railroad to this location, then people will build a city here!"
First the single line between two locations is justified. Then intermediate points are filled in at an increasing cost to the most recent developer.
you are exactly wrong again. look at the distance between railroad towns in the west. exactly the distance it used to take before a railroad engine needed refueling in the steam days.
the railroad came first built on lands donated by the government.