But Who Would Pave The Roads?!
Submitted by The Individual Right on Wed, 01/02/2013 - 12:32There seem to be a few "road socialists" out there.
Just because they grew up in a country where the state has kept a tight monopoly on transportation routes, they cannot even imagine what it would be like if road maintenance was taken care of by private groups.
The argument for socialized health-care is quite similar.
In fact, the same goes for education.
Some people cannot imagine how children would be educated if not payed for by taxes.
This is due to a lack of imagination, and lack of faith in free people, coming together to solve problems.
So what is the solution?
Either pay for socialized roads, or get thrown in a cage with the rapists!
This was part of the argument that was presented to me:
"If a person wants shoes, they have a huge selection of possibilities and even the choice to make their own or go barefoot. If a private company owned the route I take to work or the grocery store, I literally would have no other options than to pay or walk in the grass beside the road."
As of current, if you do not pay the state for licenses, registration, inspection, and the taxes that go towards roads, you cannot travel on them.
Nothing will change in a market-based road scenario.
The only thing that will be different is that we will have MANY different roads that will compete with each other.
This competition will bring roads down to a market-level cost.
That means roads would be cheaper in a market based system.
YOU ARE PAYING TOO MUCH RIGHT NOW.
And either way, you ARE paying for the roads.
So choose, do you want freer, cheaper roads, or restrictive, expensive roads that are populated by sharks that want to give you citations?
I made this point:
"Hell, if private companies can manage to put satellites into space, manage nation-wide cell phone networks, and build super-powered computers the size of a thin book, then do you think that people can manage to lay a measly strip of pavement down a country lane?"
To this, my opposition said:
"Again.. because your idea works in one area doesn't mean it will work for everything."
Are you supporting the concept of market failure?
Because that is one of the cornerstones of the argument for socialized state services.
You aren't on their side, are you?
So if anyone out there can present a consistent, cogent argument for the socialization of the roadways, I would love to hear it.
Any takers?
- Login to post comments
Right-of-way
To those who are worried about a toll booth at every stop sign:
Free market roads would be under the jurisdiction of the adjacent property owners.
This would lead them to come up with a contractual agreement concerning road maintenance.
Essentially it would be exactly what townships and cities are doing right now, just funded voluntarily--without threats.
Larger roads and highways however, would be sold off to private enterprise for commercial purposes.
We have the concept of right-of-way.
So it's not like anyone is going to put guardrail in front of your driveway.
You don't have to threaten people with fines and cages to get things done.
Taxation is the last remnant of slavery.
Let the slaves go.
LOOK
Taxation is the last remnant of slavery.
I say it again because it is so important.
Taxation is the last remnant of slavery.
Rothbard Answering An Audience Question On Private Roads
I don’t see what the problem is. The English network of roads in the 18th century was all private.
And turnpikes. You’ve got toll roads. You can see that. You can just as well have private collection of tolls as government.
And then streets are gonna be run all sorts of ways. There’s all sorts of ways that street companies collect income….
It depends how the market would work it. I don’t know what the technological unit would be. That has to be worked out by the market. It could be the whole of Manhattan or it could be one neighborhood.
There are all sorts of possibilities. It’s just that we can’t dictate it in advance. That’s the whole thing about the market. You have to see how the market develops the institution.
But, yeah, sure they’ll be streets. One way to finance it, by the way, is to have a sticker in your car. You buy a sticker which gives you the right to drive, let’s say, in the rush hour period. You pay a market price for the sticker, and this eliminates congestion in rush hour. A beautiful way of doing it.
In New York city, first of all of course either they have zero fees or very low parking fees. They have big congestion. And then the mayor says we’ve got to ban all private cars from New York, from Manhattan.
It’s typical of government in action. Either you subsidize something or you prohibit it. There’s no concept maybe you can let the market do it. You know? Have the market and competing private enterprise, and let them work out the pricing arrangement. It’s the only rational way to do it anyway.
It’s only because we’ve been locked into a situation for a couple of centuries of government roads that we can’t conceive of how it would work.
It’s very much as if, for some kind of customary historical reasons, government was the sole monopoly producer of shoes. That’s it. Everything else is free, but government produces all the shoes. And if I came up and said, "I think we should have a privately competitive shoe industry."
And you could easily say, "Hey that’s a terrible thing. You want people to go unshod? Who would produce shoes? How may would there be? How many firms would there be?"
Who the hell knows? You let the market rip, and let the market decide. That’s the way to do it.
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none.--Thomas Jefferson
Correction To Third Paragraph Above
It should read:
"And then streets are gonna be run all sorts of ways. There’s all sorts of ways in which street companies can collect income…."
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none.--Thomas Jefferson
Amazing How Well Spoken Rothbard Is
Completely off the cuff, he dictates a great essay on private roads. Perfect grammar and structure. The man speaks in clear and complete sentences and paragraphs.
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none.--Thomas Jefferson
Answer: Private construction companies pave them...
Today.
Governments don't create anything and do not pave roads.
Governments administer projects through a system of force and theft.
Who would administer them without government? Answer:Individuals and communities.
How would we transition away from our current infrastructure? Leave the roads as is. Private companies, individuals, communities will rebuild or maintain the ones that are wanted. (Most aren't being maintained because of broke governments anyways.)
If liberals ask me that question I would ask them if we really need these massive highways and roads to big box stores? We subsidize these big box stores and corporations through creation of these massive highways. Why not have fewer roads and more local businesses? I think liberals will like that answer. (BTW we subsidize corporations through welfare programs and foodstamps too, but I would save that argument to a liberal for a better time because you want to keep them on your side.)
9-11 Media Fakery: Did anyone die on 9-11?
http://www.cluesforum.info/
http://www.septemberclues.info/
9-11 Actors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aPvJSQtmoE
Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.. fake videos.. fake photos
An Appeal To Heaven gave me the answer.
Good intentions will pave the roads. Appeal told me the road to hell is paved with Good Intentions. And clearly, all roads lead to hell in this country...
He posted it on the wrong thread, I think, but I'll move it over here.
Ron Paul supports a new 9-11 investigation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH9nOWnp5G0
Bob
Bob will pave the roads. I talked to him this evening, he said "no worries, I will pave the roads." Then he said, "if you do not want your roads paved... it's all good.... I will not pave your road."
Problem Solved.
jrd is still here... kinda in a weird sort of way. She also just might be the happiest girl in the world because she got exactly what she wanted which was a perfect summer wandering playlist.
Was Bob drunk?You know --
Was Bob drunk?
You know -- Internet rant sensation Bob of "Drinking with Bob."
School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me
I do not know the Bob of whom you speak
But the Bob I talked to was not drunk. Or, maybe he was.... who ever really knows these days? He did say he would pave the roads though. I thought that was nice of him.
jrd is still here... kinda in a weird sort of way. She also just might be the happiest girl in the world because she got exactly what she wanted which was a perfect summer wandering playlist.
Lol. Yeah, who really knows
Lol. Yeah, who really knows these days. lol.
School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me
How do customers pay for the road?
In neighborhoods and other places where tolls are unrealistic?
In the absence of taxation,
In the absence of taxation, society would be far more prosperous and property owners would have more in their pocket to go around.
Since there will always be a demand for roads, communities will come together and undoubtedly form some sort of contractual agreement.
Think of condos and gated communities.
Their roads always look nicer than the public ones because they budget properly.
This is also in a property owner's best interest because having well paved roads increases the property value.
Self interest can solve these problems, not threats and coercion.
Walter Block
I haven't taken the time to read every post in this thread, so I may be duplicating, but Walter Block has addressed this. Here's a start:
http://mises.org/daily/3416
No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul
Paper bags
RE- rp4pres
Most people who cant think their way out of a paper bag base their arguments on Ad hominen attacks like 'dumbass'. It is the signature of an intellectual lightweight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies.
Your argument is centered on your expensive $8000 driveway quote but fails to address what is well known in the industry as "the last mile". 90% of the costs are in the last mile.
Fiber optic networks are no different than roads. Large swaths of land need to be rented, dug up sidewalk width and expensive cable laid. Economies of scale get amortized over future users. Getting it from the interstate (or node) to your driveway will be 95% of the cost. Level3 does much of this privately and it is as pertinent to some businesses existence as roads. The cost to build and use Level3 is known and billed directly to you based on the length of your last mile and your use rate. The build and use cost of the roads from the government is a complete unknown. At times buried in various taxes and when that ponzi scheme fails they erect a few tolls to further cook the books.
Yet you still claim its impossible for roads to be done this way despite the fact that most roads are made by private companies commissioned by the government. The only thing the government brings to the table is eminent domain (monopoly of force to violently force the sale of property to the government at market discounted rates) which by definition puts the roads in the places the market least cares for them. Private companies have been known to purchase large tracks of land to build railroads and they managed this far more effectively than the government. Yet a road is something blessed and special. So unique it cant be compared to a railroad (Vanderbilt) or an information highway.
Monopolies on violence will never give you discounted rates for services next to competitive voluntary markets but if you keep calling people 'dumbass' enough you might earn yourself a "roads scholarship' for such brilliant logic.
See the The Cannabis Genome Project at the apple istore with Jane-Ome.
Right to egress/ingress
Our current road system was designed a long time ago and the current way of maintaining them for the purpose they provide is how it must be. We are not talking about foot roads but roads to handle man made automobiles, trucks and other equipment. The idea that roads should be privatized is absolute ignorance. Why would I pay to drive your road when I have a right to egress/ingress and can just sue for passage across your property since by your vision everyone would be land locked? And that is just one of the many problems with your idea.
This post just proves to me that anarchists have a screw loose. You cannot begin an anarchist society unless you start from square one and that ain't gonna happen. Everyone "benefits" from our infrastructure and since we are not going to tear it all down and start from scratch then it is what it is.
=~s/screw loose/I'm too lazy to read/;
This topic is also written about and podcasted quite a bit (Bad Quaker). Anarchist societies actually spring up all of the time when government go bankrupt so you dont have to worry about the feasibility of it. In those cases all of the "public" property becomes truly public and the regulations disappear so your right to egress/ingress which is a government given right.. not a natural right ceases to exist. Property rights get defended but they rarely include the airspace or tunnel space over/under ones land and since those options are real but expensive, the right to egress gets negotiated to be less than building tunnels or bridges over controversial properties. IN the end, all parties have an interest in their freedom of travel and cooperate to make a road. Governments didnt invent roads, they just found a way to convince you of it.
See the The Cannabis Genome Project at the apple istore with Jane-Ome.
What a pathetic and insulting straw argument.
"Governments didn't invent roads, they just found a way to convince you of it."
What a pathetic and insulting straw argument. He didn't say government invented roads. Roads are controlled through force, and the day after the "financial collapse" which you think will liberate you, the roads will STILL be controlled by force, because there's value there, and covetous men will want to charge tolls, that is until we band together and kill them.
After that, roads will once again be opened, and paid for like civilized people, through representative government. We'll use collective force to stomp toll collector ass, and run you Anarchists into the hills.
Anarachists...
I have been labeled an anarchist by many acquaintances, then I come to this thread and I am a socialist because I do not see how privatized roads would work. Of course, a lot of people here were quick to suggest some reading material on this, which I will get to eventually, but until then, the response I got when I asked what would happen to existing roads and highways was... "I don't know." So, maybe it is not the best plan ever. I also think the roads are the least of our problems right now.
jrd is still here... kinda in a weird sort of way. She also just might be the happiest girl in the world because she got exactly what she wanted which was a perfect summer wandering playlist.
They want to argue that toll roads equal liberty.
They want to argue that toll roads equal liberty. It's not possible, but they'll try. The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect liberty, and your ability to travel is integral to your liberty.
Imagine if you were surrounded by private property and you needed to pay the toll collector to get from point A to point B. That's not liberty. They'll try to compare roads to fiber optics and phones, but those aren't required to serve liberty and should be privately funded.
I don't need fiber optic lines or phones to be free, but I do need to be able to move around without some toll collector pointing his gun at me. I support private property rights, so we need public artery's or else you'll be surrounded by private property and toll collectors.
Roads (and even schools) serve liberty, and should be publicly funded. That way the toll collector needs to make their case in public to our representatives rather than behind closed doors.
I consider myself and anarchist.
But I think the road system is the only part of the current system that makes sense. We pay for roads at the pump via gas taxes. The heavier your vehicle the more fuel you purchase and the more wear and tear you cause. So it is not a forced system at all. If you don't want to pay, then don't buy fuel, and consequently don't drive. It certainly is not a perfect system but it is as fair as anything the government does.
As someone stated above, the system is already there.
And governments don't build roads, they just acquire land and procure contracts for the construction (always low bid for transportation infrastructure), and contract out design.
imagine a toll collector serving the principle of self interest.
The worst part is; could you imagine a toll collector serving the principle of self interest? They would operate on a simple equation to maximize profit based on the number of people who agree to pay the toll weighed against the number who decide it's too much and turn around. It would have NOTHING to do with road maintenance and upkeep. Next to nothing would go back into the road, but instead, it would go towards muscle, towards hired goons to control the road in which they're charging WAY to much for. It's still all just force. It would be a NIGHTMARE, and something worth starting a war over.
The whole Anarchy thing collapses under the weight of roads, because it's very hard to pretend that the world is filled with good people once you start envisioning a world filled with toll collectors.
As far as a Gas tax, we're right back at taxes again, government, force, and we're throwing in a middle man who'll either need to be paid or forced. I say local government, bottom up ownership operating in the light of day, accountable to a budget and the people they represent.
How are gas taxes forceful?
Income taxes are forceful. You have a choice not to buy gas and not to drive. If you want to use the roads, than pay your way at the pump. If not, don't. I see nothing forceful in this. Even property taxes are forceful because even though you may choose not to own a home, you must rent at least. Renters indirectly pay property tax. And the worse part is that most of the money goes to schools. You may not have children and you may understand that they are more about indoctrination than education. So these taxes are immoral to me. I think the gas tax/road system works just fine. If there is only one toll road that goes to where you are going than you are right. There would be no competition so the operator would have a monopoly. Toll roads can sometimes work but I do not think it is the best idea.
Because I don't want to collect your taxes.
Because I wouldn't collect your taxes. I want to sell gas as cheaply as I can. What are you going to do when I tell you to go pack sand Anarchist? Who's going to collect these taxes?
Am I going to have any representation within that organization? Will you have the consent of the people before you start using force against them? You oppose Government, so you are by definition just a looter stealing from people at a gas pump operating from behind closed doors serving the principle of self interest.
I'd have no problem starting a war and rounding you up. I'd offer people everything you'd deny them; justice, representation, transparency, and consent. We'd mop the floor with you.
Ha!
Is that what the government offers? Justice, representation, transparency, and consent?
I have one request. Can I opt out? I'll go ahead and answer it for you. NOPE. If it was optional nobody would sign up. So you have yourself a monopoly that stretches over every square inch of the planet. You do not have my consent, you do not represent me, I do not feel justice is in my favor and, well, transparency...lmfao.
http://batr.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond...
You must be a communist or a comedian?
Your roads are not free. Your government delivered roads are funded by stolen money. The gun at the toll is at least honest in that hes collecting money for a specific service and you can choose to take non-toll roads, train or fly. The money taken in taxation to fund your roads (so you dont have to face the realism of the toll) is less honest as you have no idea how its being used. You do not have the right to freedom of movement if it means I'm forced to pay for it.
See the The Cannabis Genome Project at the apple istore with Jane-Ome.
Who said they're free?
Who said they're free?
"Your government delivered roads are funded by stolen money."
I'm happy to pay for roads to make sure the world never becomes an Anarchist utopia of toll collectors. It's about protecting peoples liberty. You're an Anarchist and like I've said many times, Anarchists are WORTHLESS to liberty, a DETRIMENT, because they've decided a world filled with goon squads and toll collectors serving the principle of self interest sounds like freedom.
"The gun at the toll is at least honest"
Yes, a very honest looter... I'd sooner kill him and go to war rounding up all the parasites and toll collectors. Do you imagine yourself as the man with the gun collecting tolls?
"you can choose to take non-toll roads"
The non-toll roads? ROFL. Why would there be any non-toll road anywhere? Where would they be, next to the toll road, or at the "free road salvation army"? I'd be surrounded by private property, land locked, and I'd have no business on another persons private property. I wouldn't even be able to WALK to the airport through private property.
"You do not have the right to freedom of movement if it means I'm forced to pay for it."
Sure I do, and you want to TAKE THAT RIGHT from me by destroying the American Republic and putting a toll collector on every road in my country, good luck... I'd sooner go to war and help round up all the Anarchists before I let that happen, so grab your gun tin soldier. You want to be an enemy of my country, so be it.
You have a very sad viewpoint of anarchy
I don't know from where it comes, but you've been brainwashed as to what anarchy would be like. Your view seems like a mixed bag of both tyranny and corporatism with a few anarchist type freedoms tossed in for good measure.
You do realize that under total anarchy, the market would set prices, wages, taxes, interest rates and inflation, right? With that as a given and adding the given that all people are now empowered to design, produce, barter and sell any product or service on the planet, what would the economy look like?
Hint: There probably wouldn't exist any bankers, insurance, finance advisers, tax collectors, IRS agents, government leeches, (hell, 99% of the government would be gone) or even the entire top half of most corporations.
Without those massive groups of people leeching off of others, the productive people would earning many times current rates for their labor. This basically returns the wealth from the banks to the people. Do you really believe that under such a scenario, people wouldn't form coops or some other joint venture to maintain the road system they've known to be so important all their lives?
On the other hand, maybe we just need wide, low traffic sidewalks for our residential areas because some new transit system got funded instead.
Agreed and nicely said. I
Agreed and nicely said.
I too can't escape thinking that people who argue privitizing roads and a few other things that work just fine socially haven't thought out their argument.
They don't see their call for this activity is extreme and that it plays into the hands of those who control the world and that if those controllers are rounded up, our government(s) will act according to our country's constitution and answer our requests, including those of road maintenance, the wiping away of these calls.
Up to a few years ago, calls for privitizing roads and other social services among us, the commoners, were nonexistent. I heard nothing about this privitization until Ron Paul ran in 2007, and even then it was almost nil. But since about 2010, this topic has encroached mainstream discussion. In fact, I expect to hear media heads bring up this topic, privitization of social services such as roads, high ways and parks, in the next two or three years.
From the acknowledgement of a certain bookish, observation stance, it's no wonder posts calling for the privitization of things social that operate fine are moving to the fore. I surmise this idea is from parroting books promoting end-to-end-spectrum-of-life changes. If the promotion of this idea is from those books rather than the person hearing the idea and thinking about it relative to the past, present and how things would be if what he promotes happens or doesn't happen, that person is engaged in self aggrandizement, deception or, what I hope, miscomprehension.
School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me
"Post Roads"
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "To establish Post Offices and post Roads".
That clause is vague. It doesn't specify if roads have to be government owned or are licensed by government to charge tolls every half mile to the tune of its owners.
We do know that Benjamin Franklin was the first CEO of American Express (or was it United Parcel?) though.
One way or another, government is going to be very wrapped up in roads. One of Ron Paul's concerns with Gov. Perry's NAFTA highway is the amount of land that has to be condemned for it. There will have to be a lot of cooperation to enforce eminent domain for the profit of Gov. Perry's favored Spanish corporation. Kelo vs. New London helped pave the way to condemn land for the common good and private profits. Why isn't Gov. Perry getting more support from the supporters of private toll roads here?