History

Re: The SS United States

CrazyCoot — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:12:37 GMT

Benjamin:

"unless they turn a profit they have made us all poorer and were wasted time, capital, and labor"

That's just bunk, and you know it.

Taking care of orphans, for example, does not, will not, cannot, never has and never will "turn a profit" for the orphanage. Maybe donations come from the government or from private sources, but they'll only ever be donations; there won't ever be any profits from feeding, housing and educating orphans (unless of course orphanages are turned into Dickensian sweatshops of some kind).

But taking care of orphans does in fact make society richer, if it allows them to grow up to become contributing members of society, as opposed to growing up on the streets, turning to crime and becoming a drain on society.

Sidewalks have never "turned a profit," but without sidewalks, none of the storefronts on the street would be able to do business, and productive members of society will be hit by cars, causing society to be poorer.

The costs of sidewalks and orphanages are specific, but their benefits accrue to all of society.

And no, the aircraft carriers were not used for anything productive.

Well, you could always put the orphans through some form of indentured servitude/apprenticeship program and then take a cut of their wages for the rest of your life.

Re: The SS United States

Southern — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:06:48 GMT

Benjamin:

So let's say that someone intentionally boards the SS United States and refuses to pay the fare or depart? How should this situation be resolved in a voluntary manner?

So what does this have to do with profit? That is what we were talking about correct?

Anyway this would be tresspassing. This assumes that they would use the threat of force to stay on board, which justifies the use of force to remove them. So unfortunately this type of situation where one has to resort to the use of violence would always be a detriment to society. Both parties are harmed.

Re: The SS United States

Kakugo — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:15:42 GMT

Nice find. It immediately reminded me of the SS Savannah. Anyone else remembers it? Back in the days there wasn't a children's science book which didn't have a picture of it. It was extremely fast, seaworthy and reliable but it was also an unmitigated economical disaster.

The crew was very large and had to undergo very extensive (and costly) training, the design was an half baked attempt at combining together a luxury liner and a fast merchant insuring it would fail as both. It could have proven civilian nuclear ships were feasible but ended up being just a very good completely useless ship.

Truth to be told both the Japanese and the Germans tried their hand at building civilian nuclear powered ships and both were unmitigated failures.

The joys of central planning!

Re: The SS United States

Willink — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 02:47:36 GMT

Benjamin:

So let's say that someone intentionally boards the SS United States and refuses to pay the fare or depart? How should this situation be resolved in a voluntary manner?

No one would likely stop them given it's been rusting in dock in Philadelphia for about fourteen years.

Re: The SS United States

Benjamin — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 01:35:32 GMT

So let's say that someone intentionally boards the SS United States and refuses to pay the fare or depart? How should this situation be resolved in a voluntary manner?

Re: The SS United States

GeneralTelegraph — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:54:17 GMT

Everytime I shop at Best Buy in South Philly, I pass this thing. Thank God the government never entered the hard drive business or

my trip to Best Buy would require a forklift ! As a disclaimer, I learned quite a bit from government surplus electronics.

I still remember my AN/GRR-5 radio fondly. Trouble is, the same stuff is on the market today--

http://www.fairradio.com

https://www.fairradio.com/catalog.php?mode=view&categoryid=98

Surely, no one on the Mises site would turn down a surplus M1 or M16 ??

Re: The SS United States

Southern — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:32:55 GMT

Benjamin:

"unless they turn a profit they have made us all poorer and were wasted time, capital, and labor"

That's just bunk, and you know it.

Profit is not just money.

Benjamin:

Taking care of orphans, for example, does not, will not, cannot, never has and never will "turn a profit" for the orphanage. Maybe donations come from the government or from private sources, but they'll only ever be donations; there won't ever be any profits from feeding, housing and educating orphans (unless of course orphanages are turned into Dickensian sweatshops of some kind).

But taking care of orphans does in fact make society richer, if it allows them to grow up to become contributing members of society, as opposed to growing up on the streets, turning to crime and becoming a drain on society.

Those who donate thier time and energy to charity also, "turn a profit". The people who give do so because they benefit more than they give up, hence a profit. Their profit is in the form of good feelings, social standing, goodwill (in the context of business) exceed the value of the money they give up. The other side of this exchange are the recipients of the charity who of course get all those things that you outline and give up nothing but gratitiude, etc. Both parties are better off, therefore "society" benefits.

Benjamin:
Sidewalks have never "turned a profit," but without sidewalks, none of the storefronts on the street would be able to do business, and productive members of society will be hit by cars, causing society to be poorer.

Some sidewalks may benefit society, some may not. But being public its impossible to tell. For example, I live in a community that has grown in leaps and bounds over the past 10 years. Sidewalks built everywhere. Many literally never used. So some sidewalks are of value other a total waste of resources. As long as they remain public we will never know which ones are of value and which are not.

Benjamin:
And no, the aircraft carriers were not used for anything productive.

Says you. Those who use the US navy to extort and bully would argue that they are very productive to that end.

The only way to tell if a good, service, or action is a net gain to society is if it voluntary. Any other way it may or may not. But we have no way of knowing.

Re: The SS United States

Benjamin — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:54:24 GMT

"unless they turn a profit they have made us all poorer and were wasted time, capital, and labor"

That's just bunk, and you know it.

Taking care of orphans, for example, does not, will not, cannot, never has and never will "turn a profit" for the orphanage. Maybe donations come from the government or from private sources, but they'll only ever be donations; there won't ever be any profits from feeding, housing and educating orphans (unless of course orphanages are turned into Dickensian sweatshops of some kind).

But taking care of orphans does in fact make society richer, if it allows them to grow up to become contributing members of society, as opposed to growing up on the streets, turning to crime and becoming a drain on society.

Sidewalks have never "turned a profit," but without sidewalks, none of the storefronts on the street would be able to do business, and productive members of society will be hit by cars, causing society to be poorer.

The costs of sidewalks and orphanages are specific, but their benefits accrue to all of society.

And no, the aircraft carriers were not used for anything productive.

Re: The SS United States

Southern — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:17:46 GMT

Benjamin:
No, I won't say "what a waste". Even with inflation, $78 million is only $687 million in today's dollars, and the ship served a useful function; ferrying people and goods across the ocean.

Better.

The transatlantic ships, aircraft carriers, and Amtrak all have a function. All were used for something. But unless they turn a profit they have made us all poorer and were wasted time, capital, and labor.

So dont you really mean they are all a waste?

Re: The SS United States

Benjamin — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:56:11 GMT

Oh, well then, you've convinced me.

Re: The SS United States

Willink — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:26:07 GMT

Benjamin:

No, I won't say "what a waste". Even with inflation, $78 million is only $687 million in today's dollars, and the ship served a useful function; ferrying people and goods across the ocean.

Compare that with the cost of a new aircraft carrier: The U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford costs $5,100 million dollars, serves no useful purpose and has no defense against ballistic missiles to boot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_(CVN-78)

The U.S. currently has 13 aircraft carriers in operation with one under construction. I'll let you do the math as to where the waste really is.

(I'll give you a hint; it's not Amtrak)

All government spending is wasteful.

Re: The SS United States

Benjamin — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:22:38 GMT

No, I won't say "what a waste". Even with inflation, $78 million is only $687 million in today's dollars, and the ship served a useful function; ferrying people and goods across the ocean.

Compare that with the cost of a new aircraft carrier: The U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford costs $5,100 million dollars, serves no useful purpose and has no defense against ballistic missiles to boot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_(CVN-78)

The U.S. currently has 13 aircraft carriers in operation with one under construction. I'll let you do the math as to where the waste really is.

(I'll give you a hint; it's not Amtrak)

Re: The SS United States

Stranger — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:47:25 GMT

ICEBERG RIGHT AHEAD

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Re: The SS United States

Telpeurion — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:17:59 GMT

Hard Rain:

Brilliant metaphor.

I didn't consider that, good thinking.

Re: The SS United States

Hard Rain — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:03:54 GMT

Brilliant metaphor.