Huh, I thought the privately owned road thing was a mainstream position. Thanks for the information; I’ll certainly be looking at that specifically from now on.
I’m a middle-of-the-roader! Art for profit and art for purpose both have merit. Can’t we afford both?
BBC and PBS have produced some great programs. Some arts, e.g. opera, with insufficient mass-market appeal, are kept afloat with U.S. government subsidies. Is that so bad?
So it’s socialists, but not fascists, anarchists, Zionists, or the CIA who kill people. Got it. Socialists who don’t even have long-form birth certificates, I suppose. Public support for the arts is the first step toward genocide. … Sheeeeezh! Just go away, okay?
As for “libertarianism,” we have better things to do with our time than playing whack-a-mole with the latest definition of that obscenity. (Note that I called myself a “libertarian” back in the relatively rational 20th century.)
As far as I’m concerned, when someone calls themselves a “libertarian” today, they are in one of three categories:
(1) People who hate paying taxes but like to smoke Dope;
(2) Pseudo-intellectuals who know the definition of “external costs” but “know” that external costs can never be assessed because all gummint workers are lazy and corrupt;
(3) Wackos who think dams so big that only government can build them are not the answer to flood threats, but insurance or Chicago-traded weather derivatives are. I discussed this 3rd group in this thread.
Who decides whether a man can build a house (or a spice rack) or not? Look at a couple of examples of his finished work. I sure hope the man who built your house had learned some things about handling wood and hammers.