If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can and will hire soldiers to stand over him compel him to submit to its arbitrary will and kill him if he resists. - Lysander Spooner

submitted by Drewski from files.catbox.moe

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Drewski[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

There are lots of private roads. In Sweden, for example, 2/3 of roads are run by private road associations and apparently they do it better than the gov't municipalities.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

But you have to pay to use private roads, which is effectively a tax on movement. The poor wouldn't be able to use these roads, and if they where all private: they wouldn't be able to use roads at all. This would make it impossible for them to get jobs in rural areas, since the vast majority of people in such areas have to drive to work.

Of course you could have privately-owned, but publicly-funded roads, but that would require taxes to pay for it.

[–]Bowiebow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Your assuming the poor have no money but could still drive. If you can afford to run a car you could afford to pay tolls provided they were low enough

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Your assuming the poor have no money but could still drive.

They need that money for gas and food.

If you can afford to run a car you could afford to pay tolls provided they were low enough

One plus one is two, not one. If you only have $1, gas costs $1, and the toll is $1: the total cost is $2, and you can't afford to drive; if the toll is excluded: the total is $1, and you can afford to drive.

[–]Bowiebow 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Your forgetting to factor in the reduction in taxes that would mean more disposable income

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

The tolls will always cost more than taxes, because businesses are trying to make a profit, thus need to raise their prices higher than the government, which usually operates on a deficit in the US. But if you insist:

If you have $2, gas costs $1, and the toll is $2: the total cost is $3, and you can't afford to drive; if the toll is excluded: you have $2, taxes cost $1, gas costs $1, and the total is $2, thus you can afford to drive.

But there's a third option: tax exemptions for the poor. In this case: you end up with $1 extra, because you didn't have to pay taxes. The well-off would still have to pay taxes, but they would end up having more left over.

[–]Bowiebow 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

What on earth are you taking about you can't just pull random numbers out your arse and expect it to be a valid example.

How would government be more efficient than private business at providing roads or anything for that matter?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

you can't just pull random numbers out your arse and expect it to be a valid example.

That's what we call a "hypothetical" example, which is literally just pulling numbers out of your ass.

How would government be more efficient than private business at providing roads or anything for that matter?

It's not more efficient, just cheaper.

[–]Bowiebow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Hypothetically the values of tax and toll could be switched and the meaning of your example reversed. I suppose you're right it could be cheaper for the individual provided the government is running a deficit, however it may not if the individual doesn't need to use the road often at all

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Perhaps, but that pertains to who is taxed and how much, rather than whether or not they are taxed at all.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    You have to pay to use public roads, too.

    Not everyone, and for those who do: it's adjusted for your income, so the rich pay more, and the poor pay less. A toll would be the same dollar amount for everyone, making it impossible for the poor to may, and an expense that wouldn't even register for the 1%.

    The poor with cars still pay - most roads in the US are paid for with gas taxes.

    They'll have to pay for gas anyways.

    I'd like it if fewer people could afford to drive private cars on roads

    "Oh, yeah, so poor people can't get to their jobs and die from starvation! That's a great idea, Libertarian Right!" — Authoritarian Right.

    Or it might help rural areas to thrive

    By killing over one-fourth of their population by making it impossible for them to afford to drive to work.