> costs and a totally free system would have cost the tax-payer less. I > think > there is a strong argument for public transport in cities to be free > to the > user and paid for out of taxation. > > I don't expect Adrian will agree with me! > > > -- > Mike Stevens
The argument about 'the tragedy of the commons' goes back to Hardin in the 1950s. Basically what Hardin was saying was that where there was a finite resource, such as common-land, individuals would selfishly over-exploit it (fisheries are an example). More recent work has showed that in real commons (e.g. lobster fisheries) commoners' committees exert effective sanctions on free-riders, but such committees can't work in modern large-scale societies and government has to take their place. Ideally (yes, I know this is naive) government should work out what the most efficient use of the resource is, which might be free transport (because it avoids all the infrastructure of charging), or charge-by-use. In the case of the waterways:- as discussed recently, waterways may provide drainage etc. which it would be risky and expensive to substitute for; waterways may provide opportunities for low carbon-use leisure which should be encouraged (if putting tax on red diesel encourages people to spend the extra £5 on low-cost flights, it's counterproductive); if it's impractical to charge most users (e.g. towpath walkers) for waterways usage, government should finance waterways through taxation or Adrian's property-transfer. What is needed is careful consideration of the side-effects of policies, e.g. fisheries policies which penalise by-catch force fishermen to throw back the 'wrong' species, which are dead after being caught, rather than landing them as food, so both fuel and productivity are wasted. Also, conditions may have changed since infrastructure was built, e.g. with the mechanisation of farming, few people NEED to live in the country, so there is no *economic* reason to preserve historic villages, churches etc. but people may feel this built heritage is worth subsidising. Sean
