Question for AC experts

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
Why does it need to be solved?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a relevant problem. And I don't see any plausible solution for it under AC.

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How do you theoretically solve this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

What about the millions of people who get housing and food and medical care, etc, etc that are paid for with money taken from others (taxes). They are free riders. How do you solve this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

You stop giving welfare, medical care, housing and food to them. While the homeless and the extremely poor will still be able to somewhat freeride, at least they have a very bad life, so it's not an incentive for people to want to take a free ride in those senses. Or you might aswell forbide people to live in a certain city/town/place if they don't pay taxes or if someone doesn't pay taxes for them (say in the case of children). You can't quite do that under AC.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why does it need to be solved?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a relevant problem. And I don't see any plausible solution for it under AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the problem? You buy something, you get what you paid for, what you expected. So what if someone else gets a little bonus on the side?

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why does it need to be solved?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a relevant problem. And I don't see any plausible solution for it under AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the problem? You buy something, you get what you paid for, what you expected. So what if someone else gets a little bonus on the side?

[/ QUOTE ]

If that someone else paid their share, you wouldn't need to pay that much for it. Because you're paying for his share.

I'm not saying this works great under our current system, just that ideally it would.

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need

[/ QUOTE ]
Besides Nat'l defense, what services do you see as possible free riders (I think the market can prevent Nat'l defense free riders too, but just to nail down what we're talking about here)?

[/ QUOTE ]

If by that you mean National defense, no, I don't think the market can prevent free riders there. The same applies to many other general benefits like security, street cleaning and lights, fire fighting and prevention, road maintenance and building, safe construction, etc, etc, etc.

It seems to me that the AC ideal is pretty much perfect aside from the free rider problem and land ownership-monopoly (these last two are only a problem when combined). Do you agree that these problems have no fix under the AC system?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why does it need to be solved?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's a relevant problem. And I don't see any plausible solution for it under AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the problem? You buy something, you get what you paid for, what you expected. So what if someone else gets a little bonus on the side?

[/ QUOTE ]

If that someone else paid their share, you wouldn't need to pay that much for it. Because you're paying for his share.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then don't buy it. Would you rather starve then see someone get a free french fry when you buy a hamburger? What if a french fry got flushed down the toilet every time you bought a hamburger? Would that bother you as much?

I was going to build a fence around my back yard. But my neighbor didn't want to chip in. Oh, wait, I built the fence anyway. Sure, I'd like to pay *less*. But I'd like to pay less for other things that don't have free riders. And I still buy those.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying this works great under our current system, just that ideally it would.

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly doesn't. The state "sovles" some small number of free rider "problems" but in the process creates an order of magnitude more. It's logically inescapable that there are free riders in any state.

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
Then don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ideal of taxes is to take care of general interests such as those named above. Don't name such banal things, you're not helping. Of course taxes aren't supposed to pay for your hamburger or paint your house.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ideal of taxes is to take care of general interests such as those named above. Don't name such banal things, you're not helping. Of course taxes aren't supposed to pay for your hamburger or paint your house.

[/ QUOTE ]

They aren't supposed to pay for Clinton getting his knob polished either, but apparently they do.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ideal of taxes is to take care of general interests such as those named above. Don't name such banal things, you're not helping. Of course taxes aren't supposed to pay for your hamburger or paint your house.

[/ QUOTE ]

They aren't supposed to pay for Clinton getting his knob polished either, but apparently they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's be fair, we'd all work the system that way if we could. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Cody

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need.

[/ QUOTE ]

soon2be-
What exactly is the problem here? Don't start with the assumption that a free rider is bad, start by explaining why it is a problem that needs to be fixed.