An entrepreneurial view of public goods dictates that any service should generate more value than its costs. If a division, like public transit, consistently loses money, it's a market signal that society doesn't value it at its current price. Subsidizing it is an emotional, not a logical, decision.
Related Insights
A bureaucracy can function like a tumor. It disguises itself from the "immune system" of public accountability by using noble language ("it's for the kids"). It then redirects resources (funding) to ensure its own growth, even if it's harming the larger organism of society.
Moses pioneered using independent authorities to issue bonds for infrastructure, sequestering revenue streams like tolls away from the city's general fund. This model starved public transit and other services, creating a structural vulnerability that contributed significantly to the 1970s fiscal crisis long after he was gone.
According to James Burnham's "Iron Law of Oligarchy," systems eventually serve their rulers. In government, deficit spending and subsidies are used to secure votes and donor funding, meaning leaders are incentivized to maintain the flow of money, even if it's wasteful or fraudulent, to ensure their own political survival.
Arguing to redirect inefficient government spending towards populist policies like free buses is a trap. It doubles down on a broken system by replacing one form of poor allocation with another, ultimately accelerating economic decline rather than fixing the fundamental problems.
The most effective government role in innovation is to act as a catalyst for high-risk, foundational R&D (like DARPA creating the internet). Once a technology is viable, the government should step aside to allow private sector competition (like SpaceX) to drive down costs and accelerate progress.
Treat government programs as experiments. Define success metrics upfront and set a firm deadline. If the program fails to achieve its stated goals by that date, it should be automatically disbanded rather than being given more funding. This enforces accountability.
When a service like public transit is made free, it removes the financial incentives for efficiency and innovation. Without the pressure to compete for customers, bureaucracies swell, quality degrades, and problems like safety issues increase, ultimately making the service worse for its intended beneficiaries.
The system often blamed as capitalism is distorted. True capitalism requires the risk of failure as a clearing mechanism. Today's system is closer to cronyism, where government interventions like bailouts and regulatory capture protect established players from failure.
San Francisco's mayor is shifting the city's relationship with tech companies from passive tax collection to active partnership. He demands they engage with and support public schools, arts, and transit, framing it as a prerequisite for being "open for business," not an optional act of charity.
