Why aren't there more private roads?

[Borodog]

And just to make it clear, because I don't think I did, private road owners emphatically WANT to connect to other roads, because connecting roads are not in competition, they are in cooperation. They increase the incentive to use your roads by increasing the number of properties that can be accessed by your road, as well as increase the traffic flux onto your road.

It is actually parallel NON-connecting roads that are your primary competition.

[bobman0330]

Boro,

I was thinking primarily of long-haul controlled-access freeways. Your comments make sense for local connections, but local roads have a big hurdle to come up with a practical fee system. Toll booths would be a huge hassle for short roads, plus there are many more access points to a surface road. An EZpass system would work well, but you'd need a lot of private roads to entice customers to get one.

In the world of today, the only market where there's any prospect of competition is in freeways, and those are a lot more monopolistic than surface streets.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
And just to make it clear, because I don't think I did, private road owners emphatically WANT to connect to other roads, because connecting roads are not in competition, they are in cooperation. They increase the incentive to use your roads by increasing the number of properties that can be accessed by your road, as well as increase the traffic flux onto your road.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yes and no.

Obviously a road owner wants connections to his road, since it increases the amount of people that can access his road, which directly increases business. This, I clearly agree with.


However, this doesnt apply to the situation where there is a road connecting A to B, and someone wants to compete by creating an alternate route from A to B.

Basically, you wouldnt want to connect to roads that you compete with, just the roads that complement your road.

[Nielsio]

How are these problems any different from internet traffic?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Boro,

I was thinking primarily of long-haul controlled-access freeways. Your comments make sense for local connections, but local roads have a big hurdle to come up with a practical fee system. Toll booths would be a huge hassle for short roads, plus there are many more access points to a surface road. An EZpass system would work well, but you'd need a lot of private roads to entice customers to get one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the market would be constrained by the same lack of imagination as you are. Technology exists to pinpoint the location of my car within yards, transparently yet annonymously pay road-owners through encrypted cellular technology, identify competing routes, etc. All the pieces of the requisite technology already exists. I currently have every single one of them working in my car.

[ QUOTE ]
In the world of today, the only market where there's any prospect of competition is in freeways, and those are a lot more monopolistic than surface streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

The routing problem is scale-independent. There might be an absolute shortest route between two cities, and the owners along that route could certainly charge a premium because of it, but they would still be in competition with at least several (and probably many) alternate routes, which would of course limit the premium they could charge.

Not to mention the fact that they would still be in competition with rail and air freight and passenger travel.

The idea that privately-owned competitive long-distance roads could not exist and be profitable is belied by historical fact; the history of private "turnpikes" in England and the United States is well documented, with dozens of companies maintaining hundreds of private turnpikes as far back as 400 years ago

There is absolutely nothing naturally monopolistic about the roads at all, in the slightest. It's just another myth that is perpetuated to justify monopolizing an incredibly important sector of the economy.

[CallMeIshmael]

How are they similar?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And just to make it clear, because I don't think I did, private road owners emphatically WANT to connect to other roads, because connecting roads are not in competition, they are in cooperation. They increase the incentive to use your roads by increasing the number of properties that can be accessed by your road, as well as increase the traffic flux onto your road.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yes and no.

Obviously a road owner wants connections to his road, since it increases the amount of people that can access his road, which directly increases business. This, I clearly agree with.


However, this doesnt apply to the situation where there is a road connecting A to B, and someone wants to compete by creating an alternate route from A to B.

Basically, you wouldnt want to connect to roads that you compete with, just the roads that complement your road.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure you understood my point. Or, I'm not understanding your hypothetical.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
But if town C needs a road to town D, but needs to cut across my property

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah this is a realistic scenario.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And just to make it clear, because I don't think I did, private road owners emphatically WANT to connect to other roads, because connecting roads are not in competition, they are in cooperation. They increase the incentive to use your roads by increasing the number of properties that can be accessed by your road, as well as increase the traffic flux onto your road.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yes and no.

Obviously a road owner wants connections to his road, since it increases the amount of people that can access his road, which directly increases business. This, I clearly agree with.


However, this doesnt apply to the situation where there is a road connecting A to B, and someone wants to compete by creating an alternate route from A to B.

Basically, you wouldnt want to connect to roads that you compete with, just the roads that complement your road.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure you understood my point. Or, I'm not understanding your hypothetical.

[/ QUOTE ]


Consider towns A and B, about 10 miles apart, with nothing much going on in the middle. Consider that you are the owner of the stretch of road connecting the two towns (and assume there is just the one road). Call it road X.

Assume also that you own some of the roads in towns A and B.


If a person comes to you, and says "Id like to build a road that competes with road X. I believe I can offer travellers a better travelling oppurtunity at a cheaper cost. However, I will need to connect in to your roads in towns A and B before I will be able to get business. I will need your permission."

Do you say yes, with the knowledge that all the newfounded road will do is detract business from you?


Now, this isnt really meant as an argument against private roads. More just, an argument for the need of some "no unreasonable refusals of connection" clause.

[Nielsio]

OP, are you a voluntaryist?


If not, why not. Do roads have anything to do with it?