Are Libertarians Really That Scary?
I made some offhand remark about being libertarian at a party, and I might as well have donned a pointy white hood with eye slits. The guy I was talking to, with whom I'd had a perfectly pleasant conversation until that moment, started attacking me...demanding of me, did I (horrors!) believe roads should be private? I could see he had a distorted view of libertarianism, and the conversation degenerated from there.
I'll try to blog about the rest of our conversation in the next few days.
As for this question: Do I believe roads should be private? Well, not all...but what's wrong with a privately owned and maintained road you have to pay a toll to be on? Or with paying a toll to ride in the fast lane?
And finally, I drive very little. In six years (since September, 2004, when I bought my Honda Insight), I've put 17,000 miles on my car. (I spent $198 on gas last year -- down from, I think, $237 the previous year.) Should I pay the same amount of money as somebody who drives 17,000 miles a year -- or more?
There's a Spanish proverb I like -- "Take what you need, but pay for it." Seems pretty fair to me.
That guy would be suprised to know how many toll road are owned by private, and often foriegn businesses.
The public transprortation contracts in Phoenix are held by a French company
lujlp at May 29, 2010 1:39 AM
Thing I hate about this state is the public transportation. We're too broke to fix it right now though....
Ppen at May 29, 2010 2:33 AM
I see nothing wrong with a private toll road parallel to the interstate (or whatever route they want to build) as long as they are not using eminent domain to acquire the property.
The same as the government should get out of the bussing industry. Prior to Montgomery you could go out and buy your own bus and start running people all over town.
For that matter you could go buy a car and just go by and say "I'll give you a ride from here to the other side of town for $x". The passengers would say yea or nay. Post Montgomery and the Rapid Transit Authorities -- you now have to have a DOT license, ICC license, have quasi-governmental entities as bus companies with monopoly rights locally. Essentially you have only one nationwide bus company (Greyhound) because of government interference all over.
If you read the Greyhound Lines at wiki you can see also Rand Paul's argument about the Civil Rights act.
But the reason that they needed the 1964 Civil Rights act is that the Jim Crow laws where enshrined into law in the first place. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws
Jim P. at May 29, 2010 3:49 AM
Libertarians are extremely scary. They want to take over the government and then ... leave you alone!
dee nile at May 29, 2010 4:15 AM
Love that, dee nile!
Amy Alkon at May 29, 2010 5:34 AM
I have to agree that libertarians can be a bit scary. Although I am somewhat libertarian-leaning in some on my views, a lot of libertarians don't seem to know the difference between necessary minimum government and anarchy.
Nick S at May 29, 2010 5:41 AM
"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
"We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."
--Frédéric Bastiat (bastiat.org/en/the_law.html)
________________
That quote sums it up.
Trust at May 29, 2010 5:41 AM
The argument about whether roads should be user-pays through tolls or not kind of misses the point, and is a good illustration of some things that libertarians don't get.
The problem with roads, sidewalks, rail and the like is that they are generally natural monopolies. That is, it is not viable to create several different networks of roads, walkways etc. going to every different location in order to create a competitive market, unless you want the bulk of available land allocated for this purpose at the expense of other uses.
Markets only work if there is a degree of competition and new firms can enter the market. Once any activity is a natural monopoly, it gives firms enormous power to gouge consumers and the market will no longer work.
Imagine if all roads were privately owned, and you had to pay a toll to the relevant landowner to drive on any road. Then suppose you are trying to get home from work, and one difficult landowner decides to charge an exorbitant fee to let you through. What are you to do? If you don't pay up, you are stranded. There is no other road close by that leads to your house.
Even if all roads were funded through tolls, there would still be a need for regulatory intervention to cap costs and ensure motorists were not excessively gouged.
Nick S at May 29, 2010 5:53 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/05/29/are_libertarian.html#comment-1719539">comment from Nick SToll roads would likely cause an ease in the terrible congestion in Los Angeles and other places:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-231.html
And if somebody owns land, they can prohibit you going through entirely unless there's an easement.
Amy Alkon at May 29, 2010 6:20 AM
You could do toll roads, but simply regulate it. I would prefer the government allows a private company to take care of the roads, and simply gives it the gas tax money that they never seem to spend on the roads themselves.
Ryan Haag at May 29, 2010 6:35 AM
Amy, I agree road tolls may be effective in easing congestion. But that is beside the point.
Whether roads are paid for by general tax revenues or tolls is not the point. The point is that if roads were not public, and there were no caps or regulations on charges, it would not work.
The point is a complete free market would not work. Even if you have user-pays, it would still need a level of government regulation to ensure users were not excessively gouged.
Nick S at May 29, 2010 6:38 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/05/29/are_libertarian.html#comment-1719547">comment from Nick SWhy? If roads were overpriced, nobody would drive on them.
Right now, governments are not maintaining roads. Where should the money come from to maintain them? If governments charged tolls, so those actually using the roads the most would be paying the most, congestion would surely be eased. And I would for sure pay to drive on roads with less congestion, and not because I'm wealthy but because my time is worth something. Currently, businesses downtown don't get my business because driving there is a complete nightmare.
Amy Alkon at May 29, 2010 6:41 AM
"And if somebody owns land, they can prohibit you going through entirely unless there's an easement."
Er, yes, I'm familiar with the general concept of private property rights. i.e. they confer rights to exclude others.
Not sure how that relates to my arguments about the efficacy of public versus private property when it comes to natural monopolies though.
Nick S at May 29, 2010 6:42 AM
"Why? If roads were overpriced, nobody would drive on them."
Because if there is only one road leading to your house, you don't have a lot of choice.
As I say, private markets only lead to acceptable outcomes if there is a degree of competition and the barriers to entry are not too high. You can't just build a second road that easily if you don't like the prices being charged by the existing owner.
Nick S at May 29, 2010 6:47 AM
"Take what you need, but pay for it."
Eisenhower said something similar, actually, he had it posted in military mess halls: "Take all you want, but eat all you take."
Like anything else, libertarianism to an extent is fine, but the things to watch out for are things that Nick S is pointing out re: toll roads. It's not possible to have a free market where toll roads are concerned, and precisely for the reasons he points out, potential gouging. You have to consider the greed factor, because not everyone is reasonable when it comes to what they feel is owed to them. Some kind of government regulation would be inevitable, because other people would complain about excessive costs "just to drive on a road". Yeah, if you don't like it, don't drive on it, but what if that were the only way to get from point A to point B? Shrug your shoulders and say "oh well, TSOL?"
Flynne at May 29, 2010 6:49 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/05/29/are_libertarian.html#comment-1719554">comment from FlynneBut, Flynne, what if the government charged the actual cost of your car going from place to place? This will, perhaps, be possible, thanks to those EasyPass type devices. I would pay less for driving less, and in a 1,900 lb car, and people who drive more, and in heavier vehicles, would pay more.
Amy Alkon at May 29, 2010 6:56 AM
The problem that Libertarians face is that most people who describe themselves as such are glib pricks. Temperamentally they're a lot like leftists - smug, snide, dogmatic, paranoid, often narcissistic. They tend to employ a similar 'after the revolution' fallacy as well - i.e. after the revolution all these problems will be solved because the revolution with solve them. Honestly most of them strike me as people who ornament themselves with ideas that seem radical, which they don't actually understand, again a lot like leftists.
jim at May 29, 2010 7:10 AM
Would these private toll roads have speed limits? 'Cause I'd pay pretty well to not have one.
Steve Daniels at May 29, 2010 7:30 AM
Actually, to some extent what you pay do drive on roads IS determined by how much you drive. Gas and diesel have road use taxes added to them. Farmers pay less for the diesel used by their tractors, and truck drivers pay less for the diesel that's used to run refrigeration units in trailers. I'm generally libertarian, but do believe things like roads, money, and military are best done by the government.
William (wbhicks@hotmail.com) at May 29, 2010 7:55 AM
Here in Mexico, excellent new toll roads are being built in places that have long needed them, such as a bypass for Mexico City that keeps you completely out of the Valley with its smog no-drive days.
They are being built by a company founded by Carlos Slim, one of the richest men in the world already.
It is easy to be envious. However, he is getting the job done, and I use his road and pay $20 to save three hours of hard driving and corrupt traffic cops through the Valley. Arco Norte is an excellent highway.
He was given ownership for 36 years, which includes building time. So, it did not take him long to build, and as soon as it was opened, the crews went back rebuilding bad sections. But, I was able to get through fine. And, so do a lot of people, and all those trucks do not go through the Valley.
irlandes at May 29, 2010 9:32 AM
I think the problem is that - as with any small political movement - the extremists are the ones who have gotten the publicity. Ayn Rand defined libertarianism for many people: The world she paints in Atlas Shrugged is cold, vicious and inhuman. Live and let live, but also die and let die. There are enough Ayn Rand fans who stockpile ammunition and dream of anarchy to taint the more general idea of libertarianism.
bradley13 at May 29, 2010 9:48 AM
As impractical as private road networks would be, at least if the roads were privately owned the proceeds would be spent on maintaining those roads. No more spending tax/toll money from San Francisco to build shiny new roads in Los Angeles while the San Francisco roads crumble into dust.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2010 10:48 AM
What's wrong with roads being private?
My ancestors fought a revolution to get RID of an aristocracy that owned the country. You want to return to that? You want to go back to the time where a few wealthy people owned everything, and the country belonged to them rather than to the people?
The roads are ours! You'd rather Queen Elizabeth II owned them?
In every case I can think of (schools, mailing services) where you have a choice between something government-run and something private, yes, the private service is better, but it is much less utilized and less people opt for it because it is super expensive. You think taxes and fees are unreasonable -now-???
NicoleK at May 29, 2010 2:23 PM
something private, yes, the private service is better, but it is much less utilized and less people opt for it because it is super expensive.
Why is private school so expensive?
Because they have to pay for everything that a public school does, and taxes besides.
Where do you get the idea public school is cheap?
I'm not only paying property taxes and an employment tax to my school district.
Why do schools fight the voucher programs so much?
Because they know the flight from publlic to private schools would be massive.
Don't tell me the givernment can do it better.
Jim P. at May 29, 2010 4:04 PM
I had a similar discussion last night. Every time I said that I didn't want government supported xxxx, they claimed that I didn't want xxxx.
Thanks for the Bastiat quote. I'll have to start with state run farms next time.
Bradley13: That's what you got from Rand. Many of us got totally different things. Love of music, Love of life, Love for another. Remember, it was fiction. If you can't see the parallels between the current economic times and Atlas Shrugged, you are blind.
EarlW at May 29, 2010 5:12 PM
"Are Libertarians that scary?"
I think maybe there's a lot of wiggle room as to what they actually *are*. Maybe that's why people get so distraught? I took one of those silly political quizzes and it said I was a libertarian/socialist. I mean... wtf is that?
People around here (Austin, TX) freaked about the new toll road (note: I grew up in Pennsylvania, where toll roads have been in place for ages... and yes, you have the option to not use them and still find your way home), and I admit I don't use it myself... but only because it doesn't go past my place of work. I'd really love to avoid the backups on IH35 (the main artery from the north of Texas clear down to San Antonio, and thus full of big trucks 24/7) if I had that option.
FWIW: Ayn Rand's version of libertarianism doesn't sound to me like it's the same version other people hold. Maybe I missed something.
Lunamoth42 at May 29, 2010 7:10 PM
The use you get from roads is not only measured in how much you drive. Most of the products you buy arrive at the store via roads.
kishke at May 29, 2010 7:29 PM
And conversely, why should ANY of the following be public:
- Garbage pick-up
- Road repair
- Road building
- Landscaping
- Lifeguards
- ???
In point of fact, I have no major issue with something being public. What I vehemently object to are unincentivised public sector workers who collect exorbitant pay & benefits and practically can never be fired no matter how egregious their incompetence.
Have you ever wondered how ironic it is that those least in need of a union are the ones with the strongest unions of all?! It's perverse reality of our modern world.
Robert W. (Honolulu) at May 29, 2010 10:41 PM
I always use the analogy of a train. Given the choice between a west-bound libertarian train and an east-bound authoritarian train, I am always amazed at how many people are afraid to take the west-bound train from Memphis to Oklahoma City because the train also goes to Los Angeles. They keep getting on that east-bound train somehow thinking it might go through Oklahoma City this time.
Dwatney at May 30, 2010 8:36 AM
Part of the reason libertarian is so scary to so many people is that many people who claim to be libertarian are not. Many are anarchists. Many are just have partial views - they take one part but not the whole thing or apply to all circumstances.
A few years ago some guy was running for office as a lib and one of his main speaking points was about how the government had screwed a few local corps. Thus, corps should get rights. Wait he failed to understand (or at least didn't own up to) was this could mean a person is over represented. For example, if I formed 4 corps (which is cheap to hear, ~75$/each and then $25 each year to keep them going) then I would get 5 votes (mine plus 1 for each corp).
I think the current system of pay for roads works pretty well...mainly by gas tax so it is alot on how much you use the road. Deliveries to stores is a lot of the traffic and so if their costs go up, then prices will go up.
The on problem with tolls I have is that, they just seem to go up. A new bridge was built by me and their is a toll on it. It started at $3.50, then $4, now $4.5 -- in less than 5 years. And they want to take it hire. There is a reasonable way to avoid it.
The Former Banker at May 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Amy, how do you get around in LA without driving much?
Sam at May 30, 2010 2:20 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/05/29/are_libertarian.html#comment-1719790">comment from SamAmy, how do you get around in LA without driving much?
I don't. I moved to an area where I can walk to restaurants and businesses, and I only pick up my mail once a week. I buy groceries in volume -- like buying about three week's worth of eggs and cheese at a time, and then get fresh vegetables about once a week as I'm passing the grocery store on the way home from my writing cafe.
I put the most mileage on my car when I was driving 45 miles twice a week for about eight months to care for a sick friend in Silverlake. Otherwise, I drive to Hollywood once a month for a dinner, and mostly do things around where I live.
Amy Alkon at May 30, 2010 3:50 PM
If all roads were privatized, and someone started charging too much, over time, people would just start moving closer to where they need to be.
It's all about choices. You choose to live 50 miles from work, or you choose to live 5 miles from work. And yes, I know that there are occasions this would not work, but it would still amount to less people using the expensive road, so the people who own said road are either going to lower the price to attract drivers or people will be smart enough to find a way around. Judging by my fellow travelers here in northern Colorado, people get pretty resourceful pretty quickly when they don't want to use a particular road or the road is closed for construction.
Ann at May 30, 2010 4:56 PM
The argument that privatized roads are natural monopolies that lead to excessive gouging are spectacularly bad ones given the alternatives.
1) Publicly owned roads leads to government monopoly. So in reality, we're swapping one monopoly for another. The question is: which is better?
2) I have rarely heard of a case where gov't monopoly results in less gouging than a private monopoly or oligopoly (in fact I've never heard of one).
For example, I live in Montreal, Canada. Recently, we Montrealers have found out there is extensive bid rigging in road construction contracts. Organized crime is involved in bilking us for tens of millions of dollars per year. We're being gouged and there is nothing we can do about it. If I don't pay my property taxes, they take away my house. If I don't pay my income taxes, they put me in jail. I'd be willing to bet that I'd be paying much less if the roads were privatized than I am currently paying.
Charles at May 31, 2010 7:29 AM
"The guy I was talking to, with whom I'd had a perfectly pleasant conversation until that moment, started attacking me"
The problem is most people scarcely register much brain activity above "officially braindead", don't care, but still like to believe they know something.
Lobster at May 31, 2010 8:05 AM
Those who think private roads won't work should google Sweden and Private Road Association.
In Sweden most roads are paid for privately.
Not to mention they have universal health coverage but don't have single payer insurance.
Everyone knows Sweden is a hotbed of right wing libertarian selfishness and greed!
plutosdad at June 1, 2010 7:57 PM
I do my best to show the newbies on this but a lot just don't listen or take action so I let these individuals be. Like they declare once bitten, twice shy so I'm glad to work out you sharing the practical knowledge.
live the dream 2 at May 21, 2011 8:31 PM
Leave a comment