> Yes: open source.

Open source is not an economic system in the sense in which this term is generally used.

> Open source has proved itself to be vastly superior to closed source development models.

"Superior" by which metric?

And to add, many companies are going from open source back to proprietary licenses explicitly due to being unable to compete with closed companies like Amazon. Elastic, Sentry, and Docker come to mind. So any discussion of the super/inferiority of open source should include this phenomenon too.

> Open source is not an economic system in the sense in which this term is generally used.

We should move to a society where we look at software engineers as we look at road builders. City workers build roads, the people use those roads. Likewise, engineers build software, the people use said software. Our current system of (c)opywrong is bizarre and unnatural.

> "Superior" by which metric?

Well, I'm responding to your comment using an open source operating system running an open source web browser on an open source platform and you will likely read it on the same. I still use a handful of closed source products (Sublime Text comes to mind) but that's the exception, rather than the rule. This is vastly different from 25 years ago.

In the long run, licenses are for losers.

I'm assuming that you don't pay for a license for Sublime Text.

How do you propose that the authors of Sublime Text make a living?

Road projects are funded by the government at some level - taxes and municipal bonds. I'm not sure how that would work for software which has a potentially worldwide audience.

There's also the "what gets built" is determined by the government. So, office products get funded - but not games (unless you're fortunate enough to get a government grant https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/2162800/view/3729584... ).

And do you want to run a government funded operating system and web browser?

I don't see a model where this works... unless you're thinking of toll roads as micro transactions and advertiser supported billboards while playing games.

Yes, I do pay for Sublime Text (one of the few exceptions I make and it does bother me).

I think the government should still pay for software but with the stipulation that it can only be public domain.

Governments can pay for textbooks but with the stipulation that they have to be public domain.

So contractors will bid for the work. They will do the work. Good contractors will get further work. Everyone will be able to build on the prior work done.

WTF is open source economics?

Or you just mean that you don’t want programmers to make money?