4 ms·

I'm trying to say here that government is not the only possible provider of things it currently monopolistically provides. If you claim everyone uses roads ther

by snitko 13y ago

I'm trying to say here that government is not the only possible provider of things it currently monopolistically provides. If you claim everyone uses roads therefore everyone should pay taxes to keep those roads well maintained I'd say you're only partially right. Government, for the most part, keeps private companies away from owning roads. If there was no government, do you think there would be no roads? Of course there would! And people would be willing to pay for using them. Except that those who use roads once a week wouldn't subsidize those who use them every day. > if you succeed and claim other people did not have anything to do with it, you are lying to yourself and everyone else No, I don't claim that. What I claim is that I would like to know exactly who those people are. If I use a road to deliver what my company produces, I would like to pay for this road before I actually use it. Now my business may fail, or it may succeed, but the owner of the road gets paid. I don't owe anyone more than they asked me to pay at that moment in time. Nor do they. I think that's fair. Don't you?

tks2103 13y ago
Infrastructure is very complicated. Typically if you have a guy build a road and you let that guy control the pricing, he charges a lot because he has a monopoly. That transfers wealth to the road builder at the expense of all the would-be businessmen who would build institutions that use the road. So societies use governments to control a relationship between the manager of the road and the people that use the road. The price to use the road dips because of the enhanced bargaining power of the people that use the road through the institution of government. Typically governments even subsidize the unit cost of using the road by paying the road manager directly up front, because the corresponding increase in business is worth it across a society. I think that if you have a system that focuses on individuals and their relationships to roads and road builders without regulation by a large third party that represents all members of the society, you'll get a situation where the road builder uses the monopoly power to price road usage so highly that business investment is hampered. Usually people use government institutions to manage this sort of thing, and usually it works pretty good. I think this is pretty basic stuff, no?
- snitko 13y ago
  So why do you believe a company which manages the road is a monopolist? Where did you get this? Why is it impossible to build another road? Or go by train? Or by air? By no means road companies would be monopolies. A government, on the other hand, is a monopoly. Furthermore, if for some reason I dislike the quality of the services that are provided or I dislike the way they are provided (for example, I ride a motorcycle and government requires me to wear a helmet, even though it is only my life I risk by not wearing it) then I still have to pay. If I don't pay, I get fined and may go to jail. It's not just a monopoly, it's extortion. Imagine your ISP knocks on your door and says: "Hello sir. You are going to pay us this amount a month, we will provide you with internet access. The quality is going to be completely up to us, you can't unsubscribe and if you stop paying, you'll be fined and may go to jail. Oh, and there are practically no competitors, only very expensive ones. And if you use them, you would still have to pay us." How would you like that? Why roads are different? Nearly everyone uses Internet these days, just like they use roads. Finally, you made this point "Typically governments even subsidize the unit cost of using the road". Actually, taxpayers subsidize it, not government. Government doesn't have any money.

by snitko 13y ago

tks2103 13y ago

Infrastructure is very complicated. Typically if you have a guy build a road and you let that guy control the pricing, he charges a lot because he has a monopoly. That transfers wealth to the road builder at the expense of all the would-be businessmen who would build institutions that use the road. So societies use governments to control a relationship between the manager of the road and the people that use the road. The price to use the road dips because of the enhanced bargaining power of the people that use the road through the institution of government. Typically governments even subsidize the unit cost of using the road by paying the road manager directly up front, because the corresponding increase in business is worth it across a society. I think that if you have a system that focuses on individuals and their relationships to roads and road builders without regulation by a large third party that represents all members of the society, you'll get a situation where the road builder uses the monopoly power to price road usage so highly that business investment is hampered. Usually people use government institutions to manage this sort of thing, and usually it works pretty good. I think this is pretty basic stuff, no?

snitko 13y ago
So why do you believe a company which manages the road is a monopolist? Where did you get this? Why is it impossible to build another road? Or go by train? Or by air? By no means road companies would be monopolies. A government, on the other hand, is a monopoly. Furthermore, if for some reason I dislike the quality of the services that are provided or I dislike the way they are provided (for example, I ride a motorcycle and government requires me to wear a helmet, even though it is only my life I risk by not wearing it) then I still have to pay. If I don't pay, I get fined and may go to jail. It's not just a monopoly, it's extortion. Imagine your ISP knocks on your door and says: "Hello sir. You are going to pay us this amount a month, we will provide you with internet access. The quality is going to be completely up to us, you can't unsubscribe and if you stop paying, you'll be fined and may go to jail. Oh, and there are practically no competitors, only very expensive ones. And if you use them, you would still have to pay us." How would you like that? Why roads are different? Nearly everyone uses Internet these days, just like they use roads. Finally, you made this point "Typically governments even subsidize the unit cost of using the road". Actually, taxpayers subsidize it, not government. Government doesn't have any money.