> I think the parent is asking/claiming that public options are almost universally less desirable than the product of self-interest in the presence of competition, so their main effect is just to ensure that the private would-be monopolies need to actually provide a good service.

Well, actually, I'm claiming that a Free Market alternative should be able to win even if the Free Market includes the government.

Nobody is guaranteed to win, and I don't think a public option would necessarily be odious, but if someone's so gung-ho about competition, they shouldn't be scared of competing with a government.

Edit: OK, yes, I was mocking the Free Market Fundamentalists in my post. Fair's fair, they mock the government and the moderates, often using japes invented by Ronald Reagan (peace be upon him).