[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 2hu / fur / htg / kc / madchan / sonyeon / tijuana / vichan ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


WARNING! Free Speech Zone - all local trashcans will be targeted for destruction by Antifa.

File: 75a3c7cc610146f⋯.jpg (337.42 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, train.jpg)

 No.58484

Are the railroads of the 1800s and 1900s good example of how roads will function (or come some where close to it) in a Ancap society?

 No.58485

They were built with huge, and poorly-designed subsidies. And I think there were efforts at regulation to improve competition.

Roads in ancap will have neither subsidies nor regulation.


 No.58488

I heard in Russia the black market smugglers have good roads. So maybe something like that.


 No.58495

Railroads are not a good comparison to roads in any societal configuration. They are built, maintained, and used by one organization specifically. You can't bring your own train to the railroad. You wouldn't take a train to go somewhere by yourself, unless you were filthy rich and owned the rail. Trains can only go where the rail is built. Rail depends on a whole infrastructure of stations, crossing junctions, signals, supplies for the locomotive, and power lines for the newer ones.

Just from these points I don't think you can compare rail with roads in any meaningful sense, and that's assuming you ignore >>58485 .


 No.58512

>>58484

Nobody can know how they will function. We can only offer conjecture based on economic and historical insight. I think the private development of rails may shed some insight into hypothetical AnCap infrastructure development, but the actual process would be shaped dramatically by so many things, including whether old cities were being updated or entirely new ones were being constructed, where it was happening, the dominant industries of such a region, the circumstances of the privatization process, and so on.

>>58485

Some of them were. Other lines were constructed privately, and they performed very well. The attempts to regulate the rail industry didn't take at first, either. I'm trying to remember which of the books in my collection goes into the history of this, but basically there were successful private rail companies in services alongside the state boondoggles.

>>58495

I would point out that your objection seems to suggest that transportation infrastructure has to closely resemble what exists today. Modern road networks are thoroughly influenced by state meddling. It seems possible that the majority of logistical needs could be met in some regions through rail transport. Such cities would naturally look very different, but suggesting that trains couldn't fill a comparable niche to automobiles suggests a lack of imagination. That said; I don't think the 1800s-1900s rail networks are likely to fit the bill for such a hypothetical situation.


 No.58513

>>58485

Regulation cannot improve competition.


 No.64132

File: 80fadc46e6c9ea2⋯.jpg (67.11 KB, 640x429, 640:429, 1389105706305.jpg)

russia now


 No.64134

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.


 No.64154

Rothbard did a long and very interesting lecture on railroads. Tl;dr, The Great Northern is the model case you're looking for.


 No.64174

>>58484

Honestly roundabouts will probably become the main form of roads since stoplights slow down traffic. Speed limits won't exist either since you can always just pull someone over for reckless driving if they're driving recklessly.

That's assuming we still use roads and don't switch to hovercars powered by nuclear isotopes.


 No.67894

>>64134

Subscribed. I always like the idea of trains, but the point they made with buses is a good point. I looked up how. Private enterprises is always the best way to go.


 No.67897

File: 3d6e8912acc3619⋯.jpg (44.86 KB, 636x839, 636:839, 20106832_10154727517733314….jpg)

>>58484

Funnily enough I was listening to the Rothbard audiobook at work today. The answer is yes and no.

He explained that ideally train systems are a better mode of transportation, but due to subsidies and various government incentives, it would be more of a pain to change the current infrastructure than to just build express busways for intercity commutes and use airplanes for long-distance travel along with preexisting roads, and to mainly use trains for freight.


 No.67898

If you go on Mises, I think it's chapter 11 of For A New Liberty. Just listen to that one, it's maybe a 30-50 minute lecture so you can listen to it on a drive to work, and it's actually entertaining to listen to. Definitely worth it if you're interested in this topic. Polite sage




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 2hu / fur / htg / kc / madchan / sonyeon / tijuana / vichan ]