# "governments should not spend money on things businesses are already doing" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 28, 2008, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906 "2008-12-28T02:04:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2008, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906/1 "2008-12-28T02:04:06Z")
[Hence:](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10617056&postcount=41) > [@Should libraries offer movies, music CDs and video games?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-libraries-offer-movies-music-cds-and-video-games/478450/41): > > The position that “governments should not spend money on things businesses are already doing” isn’t particularly controversial. It just hasn’t got through to the librarians, yet. I suspect that’s more controversial than some persons think. For example, private agencies are providing health insurance in the United States. But there is a belief, based in historical evidence, that the government could handle this sector more efficiently, & therefore should institute single-payer health care. Flip it around. Would you cancel a government program on the theory that a private agency could provide some version of the service & make money at it? Would you take away a government agency so someone could do that, even if it was less efficient? I remember when my hometown experimented with privatizing trash hauling some years back; it was a mess. Some things work better with a single-payer model. ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2008, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906/2 "2008-12-28T02:12:35Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > Would you take away a government agency so someone could do that, even if it was less **efficient**? _[**Bolding** is mine.]_ I don’t know all the context and details of that thread you pulled from. Anyways, I think this conversation will not be productive because “efficient” is mixed up with words like “effective” and “cheaper.” ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2008, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906/3 "2008-12-28T03:11:12Z")
So if it’s a common business practice to swindle the public . . . the government should stop doing it? Or only if businesses aren’t doing it efficiently enough? ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2008, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906/4 "2008-12-28T05:00:01Z")
I would be happy to see the private health insurance industry disappear. It doesn’t even do a good job for those who have health insurance, and it’s a major source of waste, bureaucracy, and evil. ---
**Author:** ![Hellestal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ab097/32.png) [@Hellestal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hellestal)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2008, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/governments-should-not-spend-money-on-things-businesses-are-already-doing/478906/5 "2008-12-28T05:24:25Z")
[Here’s a situation straight out of economic theory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality#Beneficial_externalities) where the government should be spending money on things where there’s already a market. This is a case of a positive externality, where the market is not providing enough of the good or service.