Muh Roads 2.0

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: a70b7750d8b1c52⋯.png (316.24 KB, 500x357, 500:357, muhroads.png)

Muh Roads 2.0 Anonymous 09/10/17 (Sun) 05:26:00 No.67249

Many anarcho-capitalists propose private roads as an alternative to the current system of government owned or government owned/private maintained roads in a stateless society. This, however, causes issues as you can't exactly "vote with your wallet" when it comes to roads since they are kinda stuck there just like your land.

Instead I would like to propose another alternative: Roads shall be regarded as public property, but maintained by private companies. Public property means that it is the collective property of all that may make use of it, but no body can lay private claim to any section of [public] road. Any individual or organization can commission for a section of road to be repaired by any company at any reasonable time. This means that roads are maintained by competent, competing companies to the exact degree that which those using the roads would prefer but without the hassles of privatization such as tolls, rights disputes or shitty roadlords abusing their power. The incentive is still there because business owners need good roads to make good money so will pay as much as is needed to achieve this end.

This is all well and good for basic tar + gravel roads, but what about the more complex structures? Any inbred can fill a pothole, but it takes a certain level of competency and trust to be able to maintain something gargantuan like the Golden Gate Bridge. Consequently, mainenance of such structures will be more expensive, and will need more centralized authority to maintain an acceptable level of safety. So for such structures, yes they should be privately owned and funded as the proprietors see fit. Other complex structures like cloverleafs, small bridges and concrete roads may still be able to get away with public ownership.

Where I live, the only complex structures on the road network are underpasses, a 100m bridge and a smaller bridge so perhaps I am biassed as to how easy this would be. What do you urbanfags think about this?

Anonymous 09/10/17 (Sun) 07:26:04 No.67258

File: b8145b7e038331b⋯.jpg (137.24 KB, 500x700, 5:7, embarrassing.jpg)

Oh, wait. Shit.

I meant "the current system of government owned or public owned/government maintained roads".

Anonymous 09/10/17 (Sun) 11:43:11 No.67266

Streets are not really investments by thremselves, it makes sense for whoever lives nearby to maintain them. You might be thinking that using a highway with paying or littering don't damage the road much.

Check Your Premises. 09/10/17 (Sun) 12:21:08 No.67268

Not an AnCap.

>>67249

>Roads shall be regarded as public property

"Public Property" is an oxymoron.

>Public property means that it is the collective property of all that may make use of it, but no body can lay private claim to any section of [public] road.

who pays for it?

>Any individual or organization can commission for a section of road to be repaired by any company at any reasonable time.

What if there are clashes? What if Joe Neighbour wants the road in front of his house fixed before mine?

>any company

who decides?

>any reasonable time

What's "reasonable"? Who's held accountable if no one completes it or shows up?

>This means that roads are maintained by competent, competing companies

nope, it means they're maintained by whoever rallies more support, which might or might not be based on their competency.

> to the exact degree that which those using the roads would prefer but without the hassles of privatization such as tolls, rights disputes or shitty roadlords abusing their power.

None of those are hassles, and you're assuming a lot. They can all be implemented very efficiently in [current year].

>but what about the more complex structures? Any inbred can fill a pothole,

wrong, the inbred can't procure the material to fill the pothole.

>but it takes a certain level of competency and trust to be able to maintain something gargantuan like the Golden Gate Bridge. Consequently, mainenance of such structures will be more expensive, and will need more centralized authority to maintain an acceptable level of safety.

aka Gubmint in control of roads and taxation and safety standards.

Anonymous 09/10/17 (Sun) 14:46:59 No.67280

File: 02de5b671c183b1⋯.png (3.73 MB, 3392x3408, 212:213, roads.png)

File: 77b03829bf702ff⋯.jpg (59.83 KB, 530x297, 530:297, road_builder.jpg)

>>67249

>This, however, causes issues as you can't exactly "vote with your wallet" when it comes to roads since they are kinda stuck there just like your land.

Not when you use more efficient road systems like brick-layers. First pic is also related.

>Roads shall be regarded as public property, but maintained by private companies.

This isn't anything new and in the sense that roads are defined as private property, most people wouldn't really notice the difference in the first place.

Anonymous 09/11/17 (Mon) 01:01:48 No.67414

>>67266

>it makes sense for whoever lives nearby to maintain them

Exactly.

>You might be thinking that using a highway with[out?] paying

That's why I said I might be biased. There will be freeloaders, but at the end of the day the people that benefit most are those the highway connects. These people can pay for the highway and where the benefit is financial, they can make everybody else pay for it by raising costs too.

>or littering don't damage the road much.

Littering is a crime that places other people in danger and/or inconveniences their travel. You will be no less justified in keying a litterbug or siccing thugs after them than you would for any other vandalism.

>>67268

>"Public Property" is an oxymoron.

Call it what you want. It's usable by all and claimable by none.

>who pays for it?

Whoever wants it done. You want your street fixed? You pay for it to get done. Maybe ask your neighbors to throw a few shekels into the pot too.

>What if there are clashes? What if Joe Neighbour wants the road in front of his house fixed before mine?

Then he can take that up with the road company?

>who decides?

Who pays.

>What's "reasonable"? Who's held accountable if no one completes it or shows up?

The company that was comissioned? Just like with literally every other private project?

>nope, it means they're maintained by whoever rallies more support, which might or might not be based on their competency.

Well that's the fault of those who were paying morons.

>None of those are hassles, and you're assuming a lot. They can all be implemented very efficiently in [current year].

Tolls require either stopping or prior purchase of an e-toll thing. That's a small inconvenience unless you are passing through 20 different private roads and paying a toll for a dinky little 50k street.

The other two most certainly are hassles at any scale.

>wrong, the inbred can't procure the material to fill the pothole.

Then buy him some gravel and tar, and pay him to fill the pothole.

>aka Gubmint in control of roads and taxation and safety standards.

Or, you know, a liable private bridge-owner with a tolling booth. Did you actually just "But who will build muh bridges?" me? On /liberty/? With an objectivist flag? Come on.

And what on Earth did you misinterpret my suggestion for "Any individual or organization can commission for a section of road to be repaired by any company at any reasonable time." as? Multiple companies with different merits and reputations claim to be able to fix your road, so you ring up the one you think is appropriate. Simple. I think it's time you went to bed, dude.

>>67280

>Not when you use more efficient road systems like brick-layers.

Okay, that thing is pretty cool. I don't see how it solves any practical issues though.

>First pic is also related.

That's all well and good where there is land to build your own road, but when your land is surrounded by property on all sides except the road, you have no choice but to use that road.

>This isn't anything new

Most of the time when I see road workers they work for a local council. But if that's really how things often are then how do statists even "Muh roads!" anyway?

Anonymous 09/11/17 (Mon) 01:13:11 No.67415

The road is maintained by the owner of the road, lol. There are several reasons someone would want to own a road, and several ways he could profit off it. Besides tolls and advertisements, he could charges homes/businesses rent to connect their establishment to the road, providing money with which to maintain the road and traffic to the businesses.

It would also incentivize people to develop unused land because otherwise long roads through empty spaces like highways and interstates would be unprofitable.

Anonymous 09/11/17 (Mon) 04:59:50 No.67439

File: 06e1eb87c39dcf1⋯.pdf (2.08 MB, private_roads.pdf)

>>67414

>Okay, that thing is pretty cool. I don't see how it solves any practical issues though.

I calculated it out at one point about half a year ago, but using (heavily regulated) prices from home improvement stores, it costs about $0.20 to $0.50 per masonry brick, and you'd probably be able to get them at a discount if you're buying piles of them for a road. A masonry brick is 76 mm high x 230 mm long x 110 mm wide, so it has a cross-sectional area of roughly 110mm or about 4.4 inches. Assuming you made your road for average two-way use, using a diagonal brick-laying pattern since this is the most efficient, you'd need about 16-20 feet of width for a two-way single-lane road. So you're looking at about 2.7 bricks per foot, so about 50 bricks for every 4.4 inches of road length, or about 14,000 bricks per mile of road (we'd probably be looking at far less for a neighborhood store, but we'll roll with a mile of road since that seems like a good estimate). So a company would need to pay roughly $2,800-$7,000 at current masonry brick prices (which are seriously inflated compared to the free market) to build a mile's worth of road. You'd need to rent the bricklaying machine and pay workers, so we'll estimate it as closer to $5,000-$11,000 after all fees to build a mile of road. Whether it's a home owner's association or a Walgreen's, this is an affordable estimate for getting your consumers from one place to another. The reason I used the bricklayer example is because for anything short of a highway, a dirt road or brick road will suffice for everyday driving, and repairs can be made relatively cheap compared to traditional roads which are more subject to potholes and such anyways.

>That's all well and good where there is land to build your own road, but when your land is surrounded by property on all sides except the road, you have no choice but to use that road.

There are always alternatives. Whether it's underground roads or above-ground roads or no roads at all because everyone owns a jetpack, there are always ways around this issue if it's actually an issue to begin with. The solution might just be for people to move out which will bankrupt the evil road owner, but it's still a solution.