Posted on 07/21/2002 2:00:55 PM PDT by vannrox
Phew! I was really getting concerned until I read this part. "Strict" controls, no less. And we have controls here, too -- What was the final punishment for that Florida? couple that monitored and taped Newt's cell phone conversation? Who was punished for the 900 FBI files?
,,, yep, herd the sheeple, as it were
The problem with roads is that they are a shared resource, 'owned' by the entire public. This of course leads to a 'tragedy of the commons', where every individual benefits by overusing the resource, damaging the resource for the group.
This is the same problem any and every common resource/public service faces, from nationalized medical care to the fish in the ocean. There are two solutions to this problem, both of which are essentially the same.
The first is to privatize the resource completely. The owner of the resource has the incentive to preserve the resource, which means preventing overuse, in order to realize future gains. In order to do so, the owner will charge for using the resource, setting the price to achieve his aims.
The second is simply for the government, who owns the resource on behalf of the public, to charge for the resource, with the understanding that everybody paid to provide the resource, but only a limited number of people benefit, and some more than others. The idea here is to have the government charge those who benefit more from the resource pay more for it. This applies to nationalized health-care, road use, most environmental problems, and anything else the government may have a monopoly over.
Today, the government charges a use tax on driving through gas taxes. This is a very blunt instrument, which penalizes those people who don't live in densely populated areas where congestion is a problem. Replace this with a directed tax, and you can preserve the resource (which in this case is roads) for an indefinite amount of time, while achieving the goal of less congestion in a much more fair way. The only real problem would be getting the price right.
Of course the technology needed to track the movement of cars can be misused, which doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used at all. The information could be protected by the same rights as medical data is. Protections may always be broken, and technology could be used to circumvent the tracking, but the basic idea is sound.
What everybody here is aruing for is a form of socialism, where the state provides roads to everybody free of charge. It would be equivalent to arguing that the government should pay for health-care and provide it free of charge to everyone.
This is a market solution, much like toll roads. One problem of course is that the government probably will increase the gas tax and other taxes it promises to cut, and will also keep in place this new congestion tax.
The other problem I have with the plan is the ability to track individual cars...don't like the government doing that, and for this reason I would not support the plan. Still, maybe someone can find a way to track and bill the cars, but keep the data private.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.