Of course we ration scarce resources. But the nature of government services generally is, and should be, that we don’t just ration them by ability to pay. If th

Of course we ration scarce resources. But the nature of government services generally is, and should be, that we don’t just ration them by ability to pay. If that led by definition to optimal outcomes then the private sector could handle it. Government is for all the other stuff. Should we charge $500 to get into national parks? Why not? Should we just charge people for the health care they consume a la carte or should we have a national system for that? Why? As you can see you’re hitting on a general philosophy question here. My argument would be that trying to set shared government services at market rates tends to lead to deeply regressive outcomes. There certainly are smart arguments on both sides with congestion pricing. Externalities matter. Are cars inefficient? And so on. But my intention is to illuminate the other side of the coin, which seems perpetually unrepresented.