31.01.2013 Views

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Public Goods <strong>and</strong> Externalities: <strong>The</strong> Case <strong>of</strong> <strong>Roads</strong> 101<br />

We are only concerned here with one aspect <strong>of</strong> positive intervention<br />

by the State—namely, through investment in transport.<br />

It is clear . . . that the object <strong>of</strong> State investment is to secure output<br />

<strong>of</strong> a kind whose private net returns are lower than its social<br />

net returns, <strong>and</strong> which accordingly tends to be less than it<br />

would be under ideal conditions. A railway, for example, may<br />

yield high prospective social returns, <strong>and</strong> yet, in a community<br />

chronically short <strong>of</strong> capital, <strong>of</strong>fer lower private returns than<br />

other industries. <strong>The</strong> State may then find it advisable to invest<br />

the communities’ resources in railway construction. 3<br />

This argument is erroneous, for its conclusion does not follow<br />

from its premises. Even if we accept the view that private road<br />

ownership will indeed result in underinvestment, it does not logically<br />

follow that government must step into the breach <strong>and</strong><br />

make up the deficit. <strong>The</strong> contention that government should<br />

involve itself with the private economy is a moral conclusion,<br />

one that can be reached only if there are ethical arguments in the<br />

premises. But the science <strong>of</strong> economics must <strong>of</strong> necessity be<br />

value-free. 4 <strong>The</strong>refore, no strictly economic argument can ever<br />

establish the legitimacy <strong>of</strong> government intervention into the economic<br />

sphere.<br />

Can we interpret the argument as leading to the conclusion<br />

that, since the market will underinvest, given externalities, government<br />

action will correct the misallocation <strong>of</strong> resources by<br />

3Michael R. Bonavia, <strong>The</strong> Economics <strong>of</strong> Transport (London: Cambridge<br />

University Press, 1954), pp. 48–49. Consider also this statement:<br />

Transportation almost always involves rather strong . . . externalities<br />

<strong>of</strong> one sort or another, so that unsubsidized private operation<br />

involves necessarily higher prices, in order to break even,<br />

than would be conducive to the most efficient utilization <strong>of</strong> the<br />

facilities. (private correspondence, September 6, 1977, from<br />

William Vickrey to the present author)<br />

4See Murray N. Rothbard, Man, Economy <strong>and</strong> State: A Treatise on Economic<br />

Principles, 2 vols. (Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostr<strong>and</strong>, 1962), p. 883. Also, Walter<br />

Block, “On Value Freedom in Economics,” <strong>The</strong> American Economist 19<br />

(Spring, 1975).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!