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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Public Goods <strong>and</strong> Externalities: <strong>The</strong> Case <strong>of</strong> <strong>Roads</strong> 143<br />

from concerned individuals provide ample evidence <strong>of</strong> the charitable<br />

impulses <strong>of</strong> many <strong>of</strong> the American people.<br />

Are we to assume, on Olson’s theory, that no rational, selfinterested<br />

persons are involved in these enterprises? I think not.<br />

Rather, it seems clear that Olson is guilty <strong>of</strong> a stipulative redefinition<br />

<strong>of</strong> some rather slippery words such as “rationality,” “selfinterest,”<br />

“altruism,” <strong>and</strong> so on. Specifically it would be inconsistent<br />

with his theory to suggest that a rational, self-interested<br />

person might be interested in the welfare <strong>of</strong> others to that extent<br />

that he derived pleasure from an increase in theirs. But why<br />

should this suggestion be considered unreasonable? Olson has<br />

definitionally precluded such motives from the realm <strong>of</strong> the<br />

rational.<br />

It might appear that Olson is on firmer ground in using the<br />

term “self-interested.” Dickens’s Scrooge, after all, was not<br />

known for his charitable instincts. But on consideration, it does<br />

not seem correct to so restrict the word “self-interested” to those<br />

who take only their own happiness into account, <strong>and</strong> no one<br />

else’s. Surely the word is sufficiently elastic to include as “selfinterested”<br />

a person who includes the welfare <strong>of</strong> others around<br />

him, such as the members <strong>of</strong> his immediate family, in his own<br />

utility calculations. Doesn’t Papa Scrooge ever worry about how<br />

Li’l Scrooge is making out?<br />

If we are wrong in this contention, <strong>and</strong> it is somehow shown<br />

that true self-interest is limited to consideration <strong>of</strong> one’s own<br />

pleasure <strong>and</strong> no one else’s, then Olson’s view is <strong>of</strong> course correct.<br />

But even then, Olson’s position is much less powerful than he<br />

seems to believe, for all we are left with is the argument that<br />

those individuals who are strictly self-interested will be unable to<br />

coalesce into groups which can work for common ends. But since<br />

there cannot be more than a minute proportion <strong>of</strong> people who<br />

really take into account no one’s happiness but their own, this<br />

would seem to be but a slight impediment to the smooth functioning<br />

<strong>of</strong> cooperative groups.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!