Strive for Consistency: Golf Course Edition

So, I need to take this opportunity to show that yes, I argue for liberty even when discussing something as near to my heart as golf.

So in an article today on Yahoo!, the tune and dance goes something like this: "Oh, woe is me! Municipal courses are closing and the big, bad, evil privately owned but opened to the public courses are raising rates. Ohhh, woe!!" Basically, the author is complaining that municipal governments have closed down those "cheap" public courses and so golfers, feeling the economic pinch and trying to escape, have to pay more so some evil "entrepreneur" can make money. No really, I am not putting words in this moron's mouth. Here's a quote:

Courses owned by entrepreneurs, unlike government-subsidized city or state parks departments, are primarily interested in making money. Such is the American way.

Now, because I am interested in truth, let's look at this guy's assumptions. First! The reason why munis are cheaper? Because the golfers get the non-golfers to help pay for it! That is where tax money comes from to run these cheaper courses! Obviously, this bum doesn't see a problem with that. I wonder what the dude would say if I came to his house, put a gun to his head, and said, "Give me your bleeping money; I'm building a (well, kick the cow! What the hell can I say that government hasn't already done? I mean, they have spaceships, libraries, this prick talking about golf courses. What else can I get money to subsidize that the government doesn't already steal to buy?)" Betcha the idiot would call the cops on me. But isn't that essentially what this guy is complaining about? Not enough government guns taking citizen money to run these cheapo courses?

The second assumption is that munis are so much better to play than other public courses. I have played on some crap courses and while I don't think I have ever actually played a muni, that is because for that little bit of extra money that this prick is complaining about, I can get a whole better experience.

Which, leads us to third assumption. These moron assumes that privately-held courses take advantage of golfers. Now, let's just think about that for a sec. This dude has stated that entrepreneurs want to make money. How do they do that? By being better than the other course in some way. Sure, it may be more expensive to play that course, but how much you wanna bet that if you went to the muni, you wouldn't get a tee time? (Once again, basic economics. By being subsidized, more people want the muni than it has capacity for, blah blah blah, less people get to play, supply and demand.)

Anywho, this complete bozo just gave me the opportunity to show that I am a fan of liberty EVEN when I am the supposed beneficiary. Gotta love the opportunity to be consistent. Yes!

(If this post seems a little different from others I have posted, it is because this was taken directly from an away message and so I was forced to go back and really work to take out all the swearing. This guy honestly pisses me off and I was forced to find acceptable names to call him.)