<...Correct without question. My point is for you to realize how much further (and how much earlier in the historical time line) we could have gone if our societies had a government that was truly representative, responsible, and organized for the benefit of those governed by it.

Now who's engaging in flights of fantasy? ;)

Thank you, this is a great example and deserves some discussion. Our postal service has long been a successful and effective government enterprise. US mail is less expensive and more reliable than the mail in any other country. The chief problem the postal service faces is the 85 billion dollar subsidy they have to supply to the business community in the form of services. If the postal system only had to carry first class mail they would be profitable. If FedX and UPS had to deal with third class mail they would be broke.

This may surprise you, but I will grant that despite the stereotypes, the USPS actually delivers a considerable bang for the buck, both in price and reliability. Still, if the government was entirely out of the mail delivery business, it would still work just fine. Of course, sending mail to Butt Wallow, Montana would cost more than sending it across the road. And then everyone in America would pitch a fit, since mail delivery is now one of our many "Rights." That's pretty much where it stands, so don't look for any changes.

...This is where governments should come in, to serve the needs of its people where no profits exist or where it will be a long time until profits can be expected. This is the developmental infrastructure I talked about. The funded research products at universities across the country.

Real capitalists work in time frames of decades. There is plenty of investment available for long range returns. As for those projects where no profit exists, I'm going to add another saying to my list, after "The Free Market Always Works":

"If people want or need it, you can make money on it."

If something loses money forever, there is something wrong. Either you are forcing something that no one wants, or trying to make something cheap that really shouldn't be.

...Viagra was the result of a "boondoggle" in developing a heart med---and then it was discovered there was a marvelous side effect. The valid point is that as a government we can afford to enter into research that would not be warranted by responsible for profit corporations.

Viagra was discovered by a private corporation. If an industry decides it doesn't need "long term" research, it may have a better bottom line this year, but ten years down the road, someone will have eaten their lunch. The free market always works.