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.

316 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Privatization</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Roads</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Highways</strong><br />

Under full privatization, he charged, it would be possible for<br />

a firm to own a highway stretching from, say, Boston to Los<br />

Angeles. I agreed. Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Tullock continued with the claim<br />

that it would then be possible for the owner to “split the country<br />

in half,” something that even the south couldn’t attain in the<br />

Civil War. How could this be accomplished? Simply by the<br />

owner refusing to build exits or entrances, or to allow any other<br />

road to bisect his own, either by building a bridge over it or a tunnel<br />

under it. Naturally, Tullock conceded to my initial reply, this<br />

would not make much economic sense, as such a highway would<br />

hardly maximize pr<strong>of</strong>its. Nevertheless, he insisted, his scenario<br />

constituted a reductio ad absurdum for road privatization.<br />

During the next few years, my son <strong>and</strong> I discussed practically<br />

nothing else apart from this challenge. I wrote up the result <strong>of</strong><br />

our many discussions, <strong>and</strong> we published this as Block <strong>and</strong><br />

Block. 2 <strong>The</strong> gist <strong>of</strong> our response to Tullock was that it would<br />

indeed be possible, even plausible, for other entrepreneurs to<br />

build tunnels under this “monopoly” road, or bridges over it,<br />

<strong>and</strong> that this would be fully consistent with the libertarian notion<br />

<strong>of</strong> homesteaded, private property rights.<br />

Now, in Tullock, 3 our debating partner once again defended<br />

his position <strong>of</strong> road socialism, 4 <strong>and</strong> presumably used it to attack<br />

195–207; Walter Block <strong>and</strong> Matthew Block, “<strong>Roads</strong>, Bridges, Sunlight <strong>and</strong><br />

Private Property Rights,” Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines 7,<br />

no. 2/3 (June–September 1996): 351–62; <strong>and</strong> Michelle Cadin <strong>and</strong> Walter<br />

Block, “Privatize the Public Highway System,” <strong>The</strong> Freeman 47, no. 2 (February<br />

1997): 96–97.<br />

2Block <strong>and</strong> Block, “<strong>Roads</strong>, Bridges, Sunlight <strong>and</strong> Private Property<br />

Rights.”<br />

3Gordon Tullock, “Comment on ‘<strong>Roads</strong>, Bridges, Sunlight <strong>and</strong> Private<br />

Property,’ by Walter Block <strong>and</strong> Matthew Block,” Journal des Economistes et<br />

des Etudes Humaines (1998): zx. Reprinted in the present volume as chapter<br />

15.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!