3 ms·

So... most of what you wrote is just standard-issue libertarianism and I know how those arguments go. But this part intrigued me: > And if you don't like that

So... most of what you wrote is just standard-issue libertarianism and I know how those arguments go. But this part intrigued me: > And if you don't like that rides cost more in poor neighborhoods then the government could subsidize it explicitly OK, how does that work? How do you write such a law such that it can't be exploited? Are there any examples of this kind of regulation you can point to from other markets or other legal regimes or nations or whatever? I mean, this seems crazy to me, but it's also an opportunity to get you to engage on a genuine issue of social justice (c.f. "it shouldn't cost money to be poor"), so I'm willing to make the effort.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
So the hardest part is calculating the amount of the subsidy. Once you know that you just make it a deduction from the fare the customer pays and the government pays the difference. Calculating the amount is finicky because the subsidy itself is going to affect the market pricing. But in the end, as long as there is a competitive market for both drivers and ride share companies, you know whether the subsidy is too high or too low because the subsidized cost of a ride there will be more or less than it is in other places (rather than exactly the same as you're trying to make it). Because if the subsidy was too high then there would be "too many" drivers and the subsidized price would fall below what's required, and if the subsidy was too low then the opposite.
Someone 6y ago
Not the original poster, but the answer I can think of is the mail service. In many countries it guarantees the cost of sending a letter from A to B is the same, independent of distance between A and B or the popularity of A as a source and B as a destination of letters. That often even stays the case when the mail service gets privatized. I’ve never heard of such services to originally be privatized, though, or of the service to be privatized to multiple providers (say with one company serving the large cities and another the countryside, or one doing half the country, and another doing the other half) Also: are you sure this is libertarianism? I would think subsidies can’t exist in a libertarian world because the government doesn’t exist there.
julienb_sea 6y ago
Typically lower income folks can received reduced fare or free public transportation cards. Municipalities around the world are opening up to the idea of explicitly subsidizing ubers or replacing mass transit with uber in some cases: https://prospect.org/infrastructure/cities-turn-uber-instead-buses-trains/ https://prospect.org/infrastructure/cities-turn-uber-instead... This is a relatively new model, although makes a lot of sense (lower cost and more flexibility to operate uber pools vs empty buses late at night). It is not a stretch to assume you could get income based "discount cards" for uber usage.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

So the hardest part is calculating the amount of the subsidy. Once you know that you just make it a deduction from the fare the customer pays and the government pays the difference. Calculating the amount is finicky because the subsidy itself is going to affect the market pricing. But in the end, as long as there is a competitive market for both drivers and ride share companies, you know whether the subsidy is too high or too low because the subsidized cost of a ride there will be more or less than it is in other places (rather than exactly the same as you're trying to make it). Because if the subsidy was too high then there would be "too many" drivers and the subsidized price would fall below what's required, and if the subsidy was too low then the opposite.

Someone 6y ago

Not the original poster, but the answer I can think of is the mail service. In many countries it guarantees the cost of sending a letter from A to B is the same, independent of distance between A and B or the popularity of A as a source and B as a destination of letters. That often even stays the case when the mail service gets privatized. I’ve never heard of such services to originally be privatized, though, or of the service to be privatized to multiple providers (say with one company serving the large cities and another the countryside, or one doing half the country, and another doing the other half) Also: are you sure this is libertarianism? I would think subsidies can’t exist in a libertarian world because the government doesn’t exist there.

julienb_sea 6y ago

Typically lower income folks can received reduced fare or free public transportation cards. Municipalities around the world are opening up to the idea of explicitly subsidizing ubers or replacing mass transit with uber in some cases: https://prospect.org/infrastructure/cities-turn-uber-instead-buses-trains/ https://prospect.org/infrastructure/cities-turn-uber-instead... This is a relatively new model, although makes a lot of sense (lower cost and more flexibility to operate uber pools vs empty buses late at night). It is not a stretch to assume you could get income based "discount cards" for uber usage.