I've long suspected that there is a problem with the evolution of street cleaning in a free market. Imagine a shopping district which tends to become cluttered with rubbish, making the area less attractive to shoppers. Suppose that if all the shop keepers banded together and contributed to hiring street cleaning services for the area then there would be a net benefit in terms of extra visitors that would lead to extra profits that are greater than the cost of the cleaners by some small margin. Now the problem is that if one of the shop-keepers does not want to join the scheme then what can be done? The other shop keepers can not force him to join in. Now the shop keeper that won't pay causes all sorts of problems: 1. it means that the others will have to pay more and the cost benefit equation may no longer work. 2. Other shop keepers may get angry and say "well if he's not paying then why should I". The system may all too easily fail or not get off the ground in the first place.
I've just read "Economics in one lesson" by Henry Haslitt and noted that on page 69, "street cleaners" is included in a list of "public officeholders whose services are really needed", so maybe Mr Hazlitt agrees.
I also remember that there were examples in "The selfish gene" by Richard Dawkins where he shows how certain groups of animals behave sub-optimally (with respect to avoiding predation) because the "optimal" behavior can not evolve due to problems almost identical to the street cleaner problem.
So my question is this: Do Austrians acknowledge that there are a variety of "services" or "institutions" that are of benefit to society that will not evolve naturally from a free market that should rightly be set-up by a government? Is there a list somewhere that most austrians would agree upon? For example police? teachers? street cleaners? "a legal system"? infrastructure builders (road/rail)?
What Went Wrong with Economics
mickanomics: Daniel: If the government is so great at providing water, why does no one in Los Angeles Country, California, drink the tap water? Why would they rather buy water from a private company? If there is great demand in LA for better water then presumably some businessmen have been badgering the authorities asking to be allowed to set up a rival water system. In order to help their case and get political pressure I presume they would also be going to the press. So presumably you can give me a link to some articles about these businessmen.
Daniel: If the government is so great at providing water, why does no one in Los Angeles Country, California, drink the tap water? Why would they rather buy water from a private company?
If the government is so great at providing water, why does no one in Los Angeles Country, California, drink the tap water? Why would they rather buy water from a private company?
If there is great demand in LA for better water then presumably some businessmen have been badgering the authorities asking to be allowed to set up a rival water system. In order to help their case and get political pressure I presume they would also be going to the press. So presumably you can give me a link to some articles about these businessmen.
Have you seriously never heard of a private water company delivering water to a house or office building?
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
mickanomics: In response to several previous posts... I am still waiting to hear about some examples of places in any country on earth at any period in history where people could freely switch between water providers (not including self provision). I do not feel inclined to continue on this thread without an example or two.
In response to several previous posts... I am still waiting to hear about some examples of places in any country on earth at any period in history where people could freely switch between water providers (not including self provision). I do not feel inclined to continue on this thread without an example or two.
oh well
wilderness:oh well
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
mickanomics:In response to several previous posts... I am still waiting to hear about some examples of places in any country on earth at any period in history where people could freely switch between water providers (not including self provision). I do not feel inclined to continue on this thread without an example or two.
Both Daniel and myself and others have pointed out that this argument is fallacious. Argumentum ad ignorantiam.
Ultimately we are arguing in circles. Untill you start considering the weight of what we have repeatedly stated you will never accept what we have tried to present to you. It would waste less time to simply agree to dis-agree. Untill then you are just acting the Strawman trying to divert from our asserted points.
We will not be persuaded as we are not the ones dwelling in hypocrisy.
nirgrahamUK: wilderness:oh well a pun!!!!!!
First you were demanding proof of private roads, now its water. I believe an example (hardly perfect but still..) you are looking for can be found here: http://www.waterforlife.nsw.gov.au/about/plan/competition
filc: the Burden of Proof lies on you
the Burden of Proof lies on you
In the earlier discussion of private roads, we discovered that there were tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of private roads in every corner of the globe. There were way more than I thought possible. The characteristics of exactly what types of places they existed in was a huge clue as to how they formed and could be sustained (it was all about contracts - which I didn't realize till the posts started coming in). The roads existed regardless of the superficial appearance of a government monopoly - it seems that perhaps governments are more flexible than you give them credit for.
Why do you think that all governments in every country on earth are so super keen to protect water monopolies when they are so clearly relaxed about a road monopolies?
Why can't we go through the same constructive process of posting up references to places with competing water suppliers?
B-man: I believe an example (hardly perfect but still..) you are looking for can be found here: http://www.waterforlife.nsw.gov.au/about/plan/competition
I believe an example (hardly perfect but still..) you are looking for can be found here: http://www.waterforlife.nsw.gov.au/about/plan/competition
Thanks for that.
Its way past my bed time again so I'll get back to you later....
In case nobody else has suggested this, there is a chapter outlining how this was done historically (I believe in St. Louis, MO) in The Voluntary City. And also they were cleaner and better-kept than the government roads.
Read it.
============================
David Z
"The issue is always the same, the government or the market. There is no third solution."
http://www.alhambrawater.com/ Is there anything you're not inept at?
Tell me about how that would work. If the bosses are running an efficient company and making loads of money for their shareholders, tell me how the company would get taken over.
Here's a better idea: find it out for yourself. If they can charge 50% more than before either in the prior case the market was not efficient and now it is or the reverse is true. Please stop making up things as you go along. If the firm is slacking on output to keep prices high it is vulnerable to takeovers.
"consumer cooperative" sounds like an area we've already been over and discussed how it has almost the exact same problems as a state run system.
No, you unilaterally declared this to be so TBH.
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Private Montenegrin firms deliver a good deal of water to people's houses during summer (tourism season). The main company in Ulcinj is called "Voda za Pice," they operate in Bar as well.
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
David Z: In case nobody else has suggested this, there is a chapter outlining how this was done historically (I believe in St. Louis, MO) in The Voluntary City. And also they were cleaner and better-kept than the government roads. Read it.
Thank you, but that book is quite expensive... and I'm a slow reader! Assuming that you've read it, can you just tell us whether or not there were two sets of water pipes running along under the roads? And if there was only one pipe, then how was the "alternative choice" water delivered?
Cheers,
Esuric: Private Montenegrin firms deliver a good deal of water...
Private Montenegrin firms deliver a good deal of water...
Sounds like that comes under the heading of "extremely clumsy and expensive mechanism" as alluded to earlier. Can Montenegrans opt out of the conventional water supply altogether and rely on these private firms for *all* their water, i.e. enough to flush their toilets, have baths etc? Does anyone actually make that choice? Isn't it way more expensive?
Daniel: http://www.alhambrawater.com/ Is there anything you're not inept at?
Presumably you've canceled your supply of mains water and are now flushing your toilets with bottled water. And obviously your private water is cheaper than the evil socialist, uncompetitive water supply so you're saving money too!