The problem is that you haven’t clearly defined your terms. You have four things listed, but allow that there are things that you haven’t considered. Eventually, everything will be considered necessary public amenities. Eventually, you will be living in Cuba without the necessity of even getting on a boat or an airplane.
I do like the idea of free stuff, but at the end of the day the government does nothing efficiently, and nothing’s really free.
> I do like the idea of free stuff, but at the end of the day the government does nothing efficiently, and nothing’s really free.
You are right on both counts. Government is inherently inefficient. And no, nothing is ever inherently “free” — there is always a cost.
Some essentials, like sewerage collection or potable water, already fall under the umbrella (at least in most jurisdictions) as things we cannot do without — and thus are controlled by local body authorities. My suggestion is that over time this definition needs to expand to include things like telecommunications, gas, electricity &tc. They are just too dam’n important to leave to the whims and fancies of the free market.
Yuh, I guess that is a bit Socialist, but not all Socialist ideas are particularly bad. Just like not all Conservative ideas are inherently good.
In my view, extremes are always a bit dodgy: I tend toward the Free Market, but certainly not an uncontrolled Free Market. There is a balance to be struck...