Shout it from the rooftops! Similar lines of thought apply for employers and schools.
I’ve been challenged by people who find out I’m a libertarian with arguments like “WELL WHAT ABOUT ROADS HUH? The Interstates are something government does well! How could we keep up highways without government?”
I have to patiently explain “I’m not against government. Or public roads. I do think, however, that companies that make their profits off roads have an interest in their upkeep, and it would be more efficient if that interest was at least partially privatized.”
For me, the problem regarding roads is not “who will build them?” or “who will pay for them?” That part’s easy: 1) construction workers, and 2) those use use the roads, or, in cases of low-density roads where it’s infeasible to collect or calculate tolls, the local HOA/merchant association.
The hard part is: what happens to the rights of people today? It’s extremely unfair to say, “hey, you have to start paying for this road now, which you previously had the unlimited right to use”. So, the issue of weighing historical rights vs. egress/passthrough rights vs. road owners’ rights is where the real difficulty lies.
Wholly agree. However, it’s easy to imagine fair ways to phase in changes—e.g. announce that in 20 years we’re going to start charging for this road (or selling rights to it, or whatever). We’ll pay you subsidies that decrease each year for the next 10 years after that. We would have had to re-do the road with your tax dollars by then anyway, so you’re not worse off.
Right. Another way would be to take the toll revenues and from them, give each person enough to afford “average driving” so that you would only lose on net from driving more than usual. Etc.
I agree that the problem is tractable, it’s just that this is the most difficult part, and those that address it give it the least attention.
Shout it from the rooftops! Similar lines of thought apply for employers and schools.
I’ve been challenged by people who find out I’m a libertarian with arguments like “WELL WHAT ABOUT ROADS HUH? The Interstates are something government does well! How could we keep up highways without government?”
I have to patiently explain “I’m not against government. Or public roads. I do think, however, that companies that make their profits off roads have an interest in their upkeep, and it would be more efficient if that interest was at least partially privatized.”
For me, the problem regarding roads is not “who will build them?” or “who will pay for them?” That part’s easy: 1) construction workers, and 2) those use use the roads, or, in cases of low-density roads where it’s infeasible to collect or calculate tolls, the local HOA/merchant association.
The hard part is: what happens to the rights of people today? It’s extremely unfair to say, “hey, you have to start paying for this road now, which you previously had the unlimited right to use”. So, the issue of weighing historical rights vs. egress/passthrough rights vs. road owners’ rights is where the real difficulty lies.
Wholly agree. However, it’s easy to imagine fair ways to phase in changes—e.g. announce that in 20 years we’re going to start charging for this road (or selling rights to it, or whatever). We’ll pay you subsidies that decrease each year for the next 10 years after that. We would have had to re-do the road with your tax dollars by then anyway, so you’re not worse off.
Right. Another way would be to take the toll revenues and from them, give each person enough to afford “average driving” so that you would only lose on net from driving more than usual. Etc.
I agree that the problem is tractable, it’s just that this is the most difficult part, and those that address it give it the least attention.