"Roger" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 May 2005 02:27:45 GMT, George Patterson
wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:
Matt Barrow wrote:

No, it doesn't. The point made, though, is that private industry
"could do
what the NWS does", and that's plain BS.

True. A private industry would do what the NWS does only better and
less expensively.

Unlikely. That's a situation in which competition wouldn't really be
feasible.
You have only to look at the way AT&T was handling their monopoly and
charging
structure in the '70s to see that the charges would almost certainly be
considerably higher than what we pay in taxes to support NWS today.


Let's see:

Low bidder get the contract. So they start out cheap, and then have
to figure in a profit margin. Something is going to either get cut or
added, most likely both. Less service at a higher cost.

You assume it would be another monopoly. Flat out wrong in the same way
other media is a monopoly.


This would be like an airline letting out their maintenance to a low
bidder.

There are few things where a government/tax supported service works
better, but weather and traffic control are two.

Assumptive at best, and wrong by history.

If ATC were supported only by user fees the cost of flying would be
far higher than today.

Directly, yes. Overall, no.