Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amd!decwrl!decvax!mcnc!unc!howes From: howes@unc.UUCP (Byron Howes ) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Ethics and others in libertarianism Message-ID: <7499@unc.UUCP> Date: Fri, 3-Aug-84 12:01:20 EDT Article-I.D.: unc.7499 Posted: Fri Aug 3 12:01:20 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 5-Aug-84 06:22:55 EDT References: <21700001@uicsl.UUCP> Organization: University of North Carolina Comp. Center Lines: 25 >>Now suppose that roads were privately held and that the ICC >>and FTC and ??C didn't exist (or were so small that you never heard of them) >>and that there was no tax on fuel and that the railroads and highways and >>airports and airlines all worked at free-market efficiencies, why then you >>might have passenger trains running everywhere, and nice highways, and cheap >>gas. >> >>-Shaun That seems like a non-sequiter to me. As I remember, the railroads *used* to be privately owned and the government stepped in because they were attempting to dump off their passenger traffic as they couldn't make a profit on it. I believe that the railways which provide the best service are historically state-run. Deregulation of the airlines, while bringing down prices on the most competitive routes, has jacked up prices for the less popular routes (like from Raleigh-Durham to everywhere.) How in the world do you have a non-monopolitic road system? Do various private owners set up competing roads along the same routes? Seems to me we'd be living on the world's largest concrete slab if that were the case! -- Byron Howes UNC - Chapel Hill ({decvax,akgua}!mcnc!unc!howes)