Why I wouldn't make the absolute statement that "government cannot provide any service less expensively than the private sector", I would consider it a close approximation to the truth than "government is generally more efficient" (which I am not attributing to you, there is no need for "I didn't say that".)
Peter's post about the space program isn't really very relevant to the issue. It doesn't say the government can build or operate spacecraft, or otherwise deal with space travel for less, but that space activity basically isn't profitable (communications satellites are but not manned space activity, and not a lot of the unmanned stuff), so it won't be done except by the government (either directly, or by government contracts, or other incentives). I don't think that's strictly true, if the government got out of the business completely the few profitable niches would be exploited, and some very rich individuals would create space prizes and such, but again its a rough approximation of the truth, since space activity would be severely curtailed.
In your reply to his post on the Space thread you compared the space activity to alternative energy. There is some utility in that comparison, but some problems with it as well. Alternate energy's goal is to provide energy, and usually there are more efficient ways to do that. The human space program's goal is largely to put humans in to space. |
