Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Question about Libertarian Idealogy posted to sci.econ
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:00:34 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <thompson.716481192@daphne.socsci.umn.edu>, thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (T. Scott Thompson) writes:
> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
...
> It is true that governments do not have great records when in comes to
> solving these kinds of problems.  Nevertheless, it is not clear to me
> that completely private solutions are available.  I think that some
> kind of public decision making and regulation, combined with private
> ownership and operation, is likely to be a better solution than
> completely private mass transit.  I trust the private operators to
> make efficient decisions about which kind of bus/tram to buy, but not
> to make socially efficient decisions about where to put highways and
> light rail lines.

	How about letting government build the main (or inner-city) lines,
then contracting out the connector/feeder lines?  Let Hertz or AVIS decide
where to build substations and commuter feeders.  Let them each operate
separate cars on the same rail lines in the city.  Etc.

...
>>	Actually, my views are pretty close to yours, I simply don't trust the
>>bureaucracy to do a good job.  Personally, I have no objections to government
>>planning mass transit, as long as they get businesses who run such operations
>>to consult on it.  Then turn the operation over to contracters.
> 
> Do you believe that mass transit should be required to make an
> economic profit?  If so then you implicitly believe that mass transit
> generates no external benefits beyond the private benefits to riders.
> Do you believe that unregulated mass transit fares are socially
> optimal?  If so then you implicitly believe that mass transit
> operators behave competitively despite the practical impossibility of
> them having to face competition.

	I believe that right now we are not including all costs when we decide
what fuel/cars/etc should cost.  So mass transit shouldn't be *required* to
operate for economic profit.  That's not to say they shouldn't *try* to be
profitable.
	Let's say we let organziations X,Y,Z decide the cost of pollution, in
terms of both prevention and repair.  Then implement this with appropriate user
fees on cars, fuel, trains, etc.  My opinion is that the actual costs of mass
transit will look even better, while the costs of operating single-passenger
cars will rise to the point where the average person will no longer ride alone.
	As far as mass transit operations go, there is no reason to have a
monoploy.  Let BUS CO A and BUS CO B duke it out.  Have several bus companies. 
Let them decide what routes they will cover.  Let many companies use commuter
rail lines.  Let them bid for time slots in central locations.  Etc.  Want to
get to work at 8am?  It will cost a little more on TRAIN Z, because they make
sure you get there before 8am.  On the other hand, TRAIN Y gets there at 8:15am
but costs a little less.

	Part of the current transportation problem is due to the fact that
everyone tries to operate on the same schedule.  We are approaching the time
were there will be enough people to support round-the-clock society.  It's
happening in some places.  I myself operate on a schedule that's shifted up by
1-2 hours from the usual 8-5 pace.  Driving is not problem (everyone else is
already there :).  Finding carpool companions is :).  I'll adjust for
that, though.

	On the east coast, for example, you think more companies would have
part of their staffs work from 10-7 to support the western part of the US.  And
on the west coast, have people work from 4-1 to support the east coast. 
Instead, we check the clock to see if the locals are in yet/still in.

	Personally, I love grocery shopping at 1AM.  No lines, freshly stocked
goods....  Meijer has 24 hour shopping for general merchandise as well as
groceries.  Once we start spreading out work times, our transportation problems
will lessen.  Even distribution of costs should not be ignored.  Manufacturers
know the value of running three shifts, it's time other industries did also.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: sci.econ