If the government didn't build roads and schools, would schools and roads not exist?

Schools, yes.

Roads would be more complicated. Like electrical or water utilities, roads are natural monopolies because of the complications caused by multiple rights of way.

The point you are missing is the symbiosis between infrastructure and the private commerce that runs on top of it.

As others have pointed out, Obama's right about this one. These businesses were built inside a thriving nation. These guys aren't frontiersmen building their humble abode from the land and hard labor. They don't exist without the infrastructure built and maintained by the whole of American civilization. Without a transportation system, an education system, and public infrastructure, they wouldn't be able to do business.

It use to be that towns themselves paid for the school,paid the teacher.If they didn't like the teacher they could hire another one.It was a public school but the town financed them.

Firefighters as well use to be paid for by the town.

It gives the Government more power over the people.

at the same time as I agree that unfunded spending is going to shoot us all in the foot in the destiny, if I have a call between spending to fix the undesirable sewer gadget in my domicile and spending to increase an situation with my neighbor, i'll pick to fund the upkeep to my domicile each and anytime. Bridges and roads make commerce possible. Wars make funds only for the merchants of lack of life and destruction. Your bread would not arrive on the food market on an F-15. as regards to unfunded spending - isn't it ironic that the Republicans, who used to chant "tax and spend Democrats" are in truth BORROW and SPEND philosophers.You _do_ know that Republican administrations have a techniques surpassed Democratic administrations in the upward thrust of the nationwide deficits from 1980 to 2011, actual? verify your history-Republicans decrease taxes and more suitable spending more suitable than Democrats. Clinton actually were given the mathematics merely actual - and reduce spending at the same time as he more suitable revenues...He left GWB a SURPLUS, and Bush blew by it on objective...and nevertheless managed to crash the commercial gadget on his watch. there's a lot of blame to flow round in Washington, on each and each fringe of the aisle. flow discern.

Merchants had trade routes (roads) and settlers had trails (Oregon trail, etc) with little or no help from governments.

The merchant class was upper middle class well below the ruling class.

Iris is right.

We would have an extremely wealthy upper class ruling over the poor, who would pay them such a pittance, their workers could not afford to send their children to school, perpetuating the problem. Only rich children could go to school, so the wealthy stay in power.

Just like they want it.

And if a poor person's home burned to the ground because they couldn't afford to pay someone to help put it out?

And if a poor person got a communicable disease, and couldn't afford to go to a doctor, it would spread - but the rich can stay behind their gates...

They would exist, but not nearly to the extent that they do presently. In fact, if not for such investments, America would be much further behind than it is today.

You're correct, this question made me think of the article below.

Toll roads and expensive schools would exist, and poor Americans would get no educations. How do you think it would benefit the country to have more than half its population uneducated? Why do you think you'd like it better if you had to stop and pay toll every few blocks? Please explain that to me.

##

I suppose you want to pay a toll every time you leave the house.

Y'all are just plain fvckin stupid.