Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 91 to 105 of 105

Thread: Would private roads in a free society have speed limits/enforcers?

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by P3ter_Griffin View Post
    If the choice was present I'd frequent a road with a policy of 0.00 BAC and speed limits that I was comfortable with.
    0.00BAC? Maybe for you. I would frequent a road that bars only people who are obviously drunk that you don't have to test in order to know if they've had even a sip of beer because, well, that's what a sensible business would do. Barring people from paying you for your services because they don't pass a technical level without using common sense is just stupid. That applies for both BAC and speeding.

    The mindset that people should not be allowed to drive based on the limits of an authority figure and nothing else is strictly an authoritarian concepts. You will not be let into a bar if you are too drunk, but they certainly will not stand there at the door with a breathalyzer to ensure that not a single person with a BAC exceeding a certain level gets into their establishment. It would be a waste of time and resources and stifle the freedom of everyone who chooses to frequent that place, which, after a while, I have a feeling would not be many people.

    In the same way, there is room for common sense, but no road would, in its right mind, bar anyone from exceeding a technical speed limit under threat of eviction from the road. This doesn't even take into account the fact that roads, unlike bars, are a necessity. If you kick people out because of a technical limit, then you won't last long because nobody wants to feel like they are risking their ability to travel by going on a road with a speed limit that they "feel comfortable with." Running a business is about being adaptive and having the ability to gauge specific situations without having to apply a one-size-fits-all meter stick. No business does that unless it's in a very technical field, which driving is not.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by idiom View Post
    It is my experience when using private road networks, like private computer networks, that the owners can be as draconian and abusive as they want and people will accept it.
    That can easily be explained by the fact that we don't have a free market.

    On a private road network your usage is tracked very closely for billing purposes, and ones adherence to the networks standards is much more tightly monitored and punitively fined. Take a motorway, you get a timestamp entering it, and a time stamp leaving it. If it is a tiny bit over the maximum allowed transit time you have logically exceeded their safety limits. You don't need to be caught driving at excessive speed by any staff.
    The problem with that approach is that it is so inflexible and deters people from using that road because they feel they constantly need to artificially alter their behavior in order to adhere to a set limit rather than being able to gauge each individual situation. The other problem is that it doesn't even ensure that drivers don't speed. If someone exceeds the time limit, for whatever reason, they will simply pull over on the shoulder and wait before leaving.

    It is in the networks interest to clamp down on bad apples to protect the rest of their customers. The safer their roadway, the lower their insurance costs, the better their reputation. The road can be built to a lower standard, their repair costs are lower and their liability is lower. All very serious business and market reasons to be very harsh about enforcing standards, not just speed limits.
    I agree, but you don't actually "clamp down on bad apples" by setting a strict limit without any consideration for an individual's particular situation. In fact, it makes it harder for you to find the bad apples because when you set a hard limit, everyone becomes a suspect.

    There is sufficient motive to limit brands and year of manufacture, partly for safety and partly for exclusivity.

    Sure someone somewhere may cater to joy riders, but it won't ever be the major providers. And if you get blacklisted, you have no right to use someone else's property. No travel for you.
    But, you see, if a particular joy-rider likes your road, it would be so easy under your proposed system to enter the road, have fun driving unreasonably fast and avoid cutting their time short by either turning around or waiting on the shoulder.

    Freedom of travel belongs to a state established to protect the imagined right to travel. That goes with anonymity of travel too.
    Did I read that correctly? Freedom of travel belongs to a "state"? There is no right to travel? Well, tell that to the cowboys who didn't have to deal with this $#@! to get where they were going before there were even cars. Tell them the state owns their right to travel.

    [quote]When I have the options in the real world in free countries, I choose the public roads. Partly because I don't want my travel data being uploaded by a hacker, Ashley Madison style.[quote]

    Exactly. I wouldn't want that either, which is why I would use a road that didn't constantly track you.

    And I maybe don't always stick to the speed limit
    Another good reason I wouldn't patronize a private road with a speed limit. Thanks for all these great points in support of my argument!

    It has been my real world experience that Government roads provide more freedom that private road networks due to statutory restrictions on the governments that do not apply to private companies.
    Again, we do not have a free market, so we don't really know, but my argument isn't necessarily that private roads would be better, just that they wouldn't regulate speed and other things like the government does on public roads now, especially speed.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  4. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Yup, this.

    Not everything is better "privately owned".

    Prisons, cops, courts, roads...the private alternative is worse than the mess we have now.
    Possibly, but that is not my point. Even if it were, I am literally shocked to see AF approving of a post that states the following:

    "Freedom of travel belongs to a state established to protect the imagined right to travel. That goes with anonymity of travel too."
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  5. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by paleocon1 View Post
    and when he turns out to be wrong about his 'superior' driving abilities LOTS of other people suffer for it. No Thanks, sport.
    That is the risk you take. The point is that everyone who drives on the road has your mutual best interest in mind. Of course people make mistakes, but trying to cast a net over everyone in order to prevent the few times that happens is a nonsensical, inefficient waste of time and resources.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  6. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by paleocon1 View Post
    The Reality is that nothing done by humans will be done perfectly- public or private. I do believe that roads could be done best as private property organised as utilities. Cops, Courts, Prisons? Best as agents of the State, but with none of their employees from top to bottom having anything resembling qualified immunity and a clear understanding that cop safety is far down the list of priorities and routine death penalty for public corruption.
    Of course not. And I would never patronize a road that expects perfection. In fact, my whole point is that we have to accept a certain level of imperfection in everyday life in order to have a life worth living. Clamping down on everyone just so the few people who cause serious accidents becomes even fewer is inefficient and bad for business, and that assumes it even works.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  7. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by TaftFan View Post
    You don't think each road owner would be making a handsome living off of the roads, on top of repairs?
    Sure, but you can easily do all of that without exceeding the budget of the DOT.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG



  8. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  9. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainAmerica View Post
    I assure you these are questions asked in 2008, might as well ask will Santa Clause be real next year?
    I'm just trying to figure out who has an unrealistic and distorted view of free markets. It turns out, quite a few.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  10. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulConventionWV View Post
    Possibly, but that is not my point. Even if it were, I am literally shocked to see AF approving of a post that states the following:

    "Freedom of travel belongs to a state established to protect the imagined right to travel. That goes with anonymity of travel too."
    Not shocking, that's been my position all along, for eight years now.

    My largest problem with the "private road" concept is that you will, by necessity, involve the state through eminent domain, in order to complete any major road project. I never want to see a profit motive attached to that. We all talk about taxation being theft, well, that truly is.

    And how many interstates will it take to make a competitive free market?

    There are some things that natural market efficiencies and profit motive should not be attached to.

    Building roads and filling prisons are two of them.

  11. #99
    I agree with AF on prisons (though really I'm just for abolishing prisons) but I don't agree on roads. Just ban eminent domain
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  12. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Not shocking, that's been my position all along, for eight years now.

    My largest problem with the "private road" concept is that you will, by necessity, involve the state through eminent domain, in order to complete any major road project. I never want to see a profit motive attached to that. We all talk about taxation being theft, well, that truly is.

    And how many interstates will it take to make a competitive free market?


    There are some things that natural market efficiencies and profit motive should not be attached to.

    Building roads and filling prisons are two of them.
    Interstates weren't conceived with the goal of moving civilians and commercial goods, so we can't say for certain. They were designed for moving materiel-just good enough for gov'ment work. I personally doubt anyone acting in rational self-interest (anyone not sponsored by the State) would build them so badly. As Block documents in his book on this subject, the gov'ment roads and highways are, in practice, death traps. If you or I had built them, the masses would demand our heads on platters.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year

    Since 1940 alone, the highways claim 30,000-50,000 lives per year. That's a minor war toll every. $#@!ing. year.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  13. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Not shocking, that's been my position all along, for eight years now.

    My largest problem with the "private road" concept is that you will, by necessity, involve the state through eminent domain, in order to complete any major road project. I never want to see a profit motive attached to that. We all talk about taxation being theft, well, that truly is.

    And how many interstates will it take to make a competitive free market?

    There are some things that natural market efficiencies and profit motive should not be attached to.

    Building roads and filling prisons are two of them.
    I actually agree with you, but I was still shocked to see you agree with that statement, considering it implies that the state must grant you your right to freely move from place to place. That I do not agree with, and I'm hoping I've misunderstood that part, but as far as the feasibility of private roads go, I actually agree. Having roads stacked vertically just for the sake of providing "different strokes for different folks" going to the exact same place seems a terrible waste and just completely impractical, not to mention you can't exactly suspend a road in mid-air without support beams that would probably be on the other road owner's property, and the prohibitive costs of tunneling underground just to provide the same exact route with a few alterations in management.
    Last edited by PaulConventionWV; 08-31-2015 at 12:34 AM.
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  14. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Interstates weren't conceived with the goal of moving civilians and commercial goods, so we can't say for certain. They were designed for moving materiel-just good enough for gov'ment work. I personally doubt anyone acting in rational self-interest (anyone not sponsored by the State) would build them so badly. As Block documents in his book on this subject, the gov'ment roads and highways are, in practice, death traps. If you or I had built them, the masses would demand our heads on platters.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year

    Since 1940 alone, the highways claim 30,000-50,000 lives per year. That's a minor war toll every. $#@!ing. year.
    May I ask what exactly is your complaint with the design of these roads? What, in particular, makes them death traps that would not be acceptable if you or I had built them?
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  15. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulConventionWV View Post
    I was still shocked to see you agree with that statement, considering it implies that the state must grant you your right to freely move from place to place.
    Let me clarify.

    The state cannot stop you from traveling, through whatever means you find acceptable.

    In the case of roads, airports and such, you have a right to access and use them, as you have, in part, paid for them.

    Government must prove your guilt in order to restrict that right.

    In other words, "driving is privilege" is a modern day fiction.

  16. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by TaftFan View Post
    Are you familiar with geographic monopoly?
    Yes. It's a creation of the state.



  17. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  18. #105
    PCWV,

    Political allocation is not the same as market allocation. The roads today were politically allocated, running through some crony's area to enrich them at the expense of other competitors, often smaller businesses. Not only that, but they ran them through areas far away from an efficient course to a powerful politician's area, so they could gain from previous land investments, trampling others land values where it would have gone if market allocation were used. Every mile of road you travel carries with it some chance of death, and therefore any inefficiency in the allocation of road construction that led to extra miles kills some group of people MORE than would have been if the market allocated those resources. That's just one way more people are hurt and die from govt deciding how roads are built, and where.
    Last edited by ProIndividual; 09-01-2015 at 03:47 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerographica View Post

    Yes, I want to force consumers to buy trampolines, popcorn, environmental protection and national defense whether or not they really demand them. And I definitely want to outlaw all alternatives. Nobody should be allowed to compete with the state. Private security companies, private healthcare, private package delivery, private education, private disaster relief, private militias...should all be outlawed.
    ^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234


Similar Threads

  1. Atlanta getting variable speed limits this fall
    By Suzanimal in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-28-2014, 01:10 PM
  2. Idaho eyeing higher speed limits of up to 80 mph
    By aGameOfThrones in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-13-2014, 04:36 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-03-2013, 04:23 PM
  4. Tax collectors want to be exempt from speed limits like police and fire
    By aGameOfThrones in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2012, 09:41 PM
  5. If private roads are feasible, why don't we have them now?
    By Rael in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 07-21-2010, 01:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •