That’s a direct accusation a grad school prof made against me. The implicit assumption is that you should live your everyday life in rigid accordance with your principles. This is stupid.
There are ideals, and there are reasonable compromises. Driving on a pre-existing road doesn’t mean I support future expenditures. At best, you can draw an indirect endorsement, in a supply/demand sense. But one car on the interstate system is so insignificant that my prof’s point becomes laughable.
The “who will build the roads” canard is a common anti-liberty argument. The old saw is that the government has to provide public goods, or else civil society couldn’t function. This is also stupid. People aren’t just inert lumps waiting for government to improve their lot.
The history of privately built toll roads is an interesting example of how private action benefits society at large. Especially when you consider that these undertakings carried the expectation of being unprofitable. An early example of a loss-leader?
{ 5 comments }