XPost: alt.autos.toyota, rec.autos.driving, alt.society.liberalism   
   XPost: alt.fan.michael-moore   
   From: tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com   
      
   On 2011-02-22, Ashton Crusher  wrote:   
   > On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:25:26 +0000 (UTC), Brent   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>On 2011-02-18, Ashton Crusher  wrote:   
   >>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:44:30 +0000 (UTC), Brent   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On 2011-02-17, Ashton Crusher  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> The free market can't produce FREE roads but they could make   
   >>>>> standardized ones.  The biggest problem I see with free market roads   
   >>>>> is if they are truly free market then you have lost your freedom to   
   >>>>> travel "freely" in the non-economic sense.  Ultimately you would not   
   >>>>> be able to leave your house without paying for the privilege.  The   
   >>>>> libertarians call that the perfect world.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>As opposed to government roads that are created with magic and instead   
   >>>>of resources taken from the population? Or is it that you want to   
   >>>>arrange things by the political process so that those people over there   
   >>>>pay for the roads while you get to use them for free?   
      
   >>>>As to freedom to travel, how exactly do we have that by the political   
   >>>>process? The govenment has its armed muscle collect tribute on the   
   >>>>roads. The government has them set up checkpoints. Government enjoys   
   >>>>making people submit to it in order to travel. Travel was reduced from   
   >>>>a right to a government granted privilege. What's better? Being a   
   >>>>paying customer or subjected to stops and possibly searches by armed   
   >>>>men who's performance reviews depend on how much money they bring in   
   >>>>and/or how many arrests they make?   
   >>   
   >>> Under the current system you are free to leave your home in your car   
   >>> and drive anywhere you want (or you can walk).   
   >>   
   >>It's not cost free, those costs are just hidden to most people. Also   
   >>I've been stopped by cops while walking,biking, and driving. It hasn't   
   >>been free travel for a very long time.   
      
   > I never said it was cost free.  So there goes that strawman.  I said   
   > you are free to travel.   
      
   Not a strawman at all. Your argument is based on government roads not   
   having a user cost. Once you admit there is a user cost your entire   
   argument falls apart. All that remains is who pays and how it is   
   collected. It appears you wanted it collected from other people under   
   threat of violence instead of as any sort of user fee or subscription.   
      
   >>>  If you think you are   
   >>> subject to "gvt inspection" along they way lets agree, for this   
   >>> discussion, that you are correct.  There is nothing about turning all   
   >>> the roads into private ownership in a free market that in any way   
   >>> changes how you would be subject to  "gvt inspection" along they way.   
      
   >>I did not mention some insider deal which is usually what passes for   
   >>privization in the USA. Where the government's office holders make a   
   >>sweet deal for their buddies at taxpayer expense.   
      
   > Nor did I mention any insider deal.  Another of your strawmen disposed   
   > of.   
      
   If government retains the power you state then you have some sort of   
   insider private-government arrangement. A free market property rights   
   system doesn't work the way you describe.   
      
   >>>   The "control" by the gvt would be/could be exactly the same as it is   
   >>> now, the ONLY difference would be whether you had to PAY for EVERY   
   >>> SPECIFIC use of the roads and/or an access subscription fee.  In our   
   >>> current system you do not have to  PAY for EVERY SPECIFIC use of the   
   >>> roads except for a very very tiny percentage of toll roads, and   
   >>> certainly not your local collectors and residential roads.  But if ALL   
   >>> roads were made private enterprise there is NOTHING (except the gvt of   
   >>> course, but you don't want them involved) to stop the private owners   
   >>> from demanding that you PAY for EVERY SPECIFIC use of the road (or a   
   >>> subscription) in front of your house and charging whatever they wanted   
   >>> for it's use. Even if they sold it to you on a monthly or yearly basis   
   >>> instead of every trip they would still require you to pay them   
   >>> directly and for most roads in residential areas there would be no   
   >>> alternative, you either pay to back out of your driveway or you don't   
   >>> leave.   
      
   >>Where do you think the money for the roads come from now? It's both a   
   >>per-use and time basis built into fuel and property taxes. Just because   
   >>you don't see it doesn't mean you or someone else doesn't pay it.   
      
   > I've never said roads don't cost money.  There goes you strawman a   
   > second time.   
      
   Your entire argument is based on people not paying, not getting a bill.   
   On my desk here I have the property tax bills for the properties I own.   
   Tell me again how this is different from what your horrible worst case   
   imagination of a private road system?   
      
   >>>  And they could charge anything they want since in your model it's   
   >>> totally free enterprise, the market charges what it wants.   
      
   >>My model? I haven't offered a model.   
   >>   
      
   > So you are not in favor of totally free enterprise?   
      
   You've created a model that is hardly anything close to what I would   
   propose, assign it to me, and then knock it down. I will not entertain   
   it.   
      
   >>>   Court rulings now give us the right to use the public roads   
   >>> unfettered for NON-commercial use.   
      
   >>It's long since erroded to "privilege" granted by government. Courts   
   >>have gone along with it.   
      
   > No it hasn't.   
      
   Tell that to a cop when you are at checkpoint. He'll tell you it's a   
   privilege.   
      
   >>> And there are MANY people who pay   
   >>> no taxes due to their income level but actually get money paid to them   
   >>> every year with the earned income credit. The amount is more then   
   >>> enough to offset the $1000 they spend a year on gas taxes.  So there   
   >>> are many people currently using the system for free and who, under a   
   >>> "free market" system could be precluded from even traveling.   
      
   >>And now we get to the root cause of your displeasure... you want to use   
   >>roads that OTHER people pay for. As to certain people not being able to   
   >>travel because of their finances... well there are ways to deal with   
   >>that... but that's neither here nor there for my purpose here.   
      
   > Another strawman by you.  I've never made any such claim.  I'm merely   
   > pointing out the logical end point of those who make a fetish of the   
   > "free market" and want to apply it to our road system.   
      
   You're not pointing out anything. You're complaining that you'd have to   
   pay for free market road usage. The plain and simple conclusion is that   
   you want a socialist road system such that other people pay for it and   
   you use it without cost.   
      
   >>> It's unfortunate that so many libertarians have a one-size-fits-all   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)