The costs of traveling would be enormous. Equivalent of petrol nearly £7 per gallon.
Now, I'm not merely trying to be argumentative, but I seriously question this. It's a widely-held view that the so-called Road Tax (actually the Vehicle Excise Duty, so it doesn't have to be hypothecated) is a nett contributor to the Exchequer. In other words, the government does not spend as much on roads as it collects in "road tax". So it's not entirely clear to me why free market road pricing would cause such an extraordinary rise in travel costs.
But even if it did, does that not tell you something about the value of the road network which is being hidden by its subsidy? People are abusing the roads because they're "free".
I would make the counter-argument:
- road costs, especially maintenance, are predominantly as a result of HGV usage.
- HGV owners are currently subsidised by other road users
- by implementing free market* road pricing, I believe that road use for lesser vehicles, such as cars and motorcycles could actually become cheaper as the costs they imply for the operator are much lower
- free market road pricing would also lead to better surfaces, fewer coned-off areas and possibly even improved road safety
He then went on to say:
Well I've looked at a variety of other funding options, but don't see any that don't result in a large drop in road users and so result in spiralling costs for drivers as they have to pay for a larger share of costs.
What this implies to me is that there are a significant number of "free riders", something that isn't supposed to happen in our overly taxed society. but as I said above, I actually believe that proper market pricing would lead to cars paying less than they currently do and other road users getting seriously fucked over, because they are currently shifting the externalities of their road use onto the motorist.
This in turn implies that the cost of road transport could increase quite dramatically. It could potentially even lead to an evisceration of the highly subsidised road transport business. I would expect foreign road transport users to be hit equally hard, something they largely escape now.
Who knows, it might even lead to a massive revitalisation of Britain's rail transport industry, or even canals or something totally new?
*You'll notice I've used the term "market" or "free market", rather than "privatised". This is because no "privatised" business in the UK is actually a free market.
38 comments:
Roads are a by their nature monopolistic (word?).
There is for instance 1 main road leading to where i work, with no option for futher roads.
The alternative route would add 15 miles to the journy.
Now you may argue "HAHA so it's not a monopoly then", but good luck convincing anyone on that point.
Excellent stuff, Obo, excellent. Personally I favour full roads privatisation, with residential streets owned and controlled by "riparian owners".
We'd need to get beyond a flat or universal cost per mile - and would. Prices should vary by time, too.
Your position on anything provided by the state is understandably always the same but it does get a little dull. Would you state that a free market would also be an equal market that would provide services equally to those who need it.
I think you're right in your premise, that a truly free market would reduce costs compared to now rather than increase them.
But that would require road pricing to be fair, to reflect the actual cost, and to be instead of VED instead of on top of VED. In the current (ahem) climate, do you think that is likely?
I last saw figures for road tax in 2008.
The tax disc generates £42 billion in revenue yet only £12 billion is spent annually on new roads/road repairs.
Why the fuck should we pay more?
Tobacco tax is similar: £11 billion raised and only £1.5 - £2.5 billion (figures vary wildly, depending on who is lying about them at the time) spent on alleged smoking related diseases.
CR.
Roads should best be funded by those who's land right benefit most from their presence.
An LVT is the answer.
And how do you intent for this to actually happen in reality hmmm?
Toll boths all over the place, that would obviously be a very stupid thing.
Or car tracking devices that can by used to automatically charge per road you use.
Yes, lets track peoples every movement, that couldnt possible go wrong could it!
Now stop being a numpty.
"Yes, lets track peoples every movement, that couldnt possible go wrong could it!"
If the roads were privately owned and there was a contractual understanding of things like data privacy, I wouldn't have any problem with it.
It's also quite feasible that different roads would have different speed limits depending on who was offering them.
It's also quite possible to have a single disk or card or whatever that allows you to use a wide variety of roads at different times without paying a toll explicitly, and the owners of these roads get a share of some communal pot based on usage.
The truth of the matter is that there are many ways this could be paid for that would make your life no worse, more expensive or complicated than it is now.
It would also have the benefit of removing some of the false subsidies we see now that distort transport.
It would have to be accompanied by equally free markets in rail, air and other transport to allow things to find their real equilibrium.
"There is for instance 1 main road leading to where i work, with no option for futher roads."
And why is there no option for other roads?
As I said above, there's no telling how which combination of suppliers would work out in reality, but I suspect that removing planning permission and allowing people to freely access land would change everything.
It's just absurd how cheap they would be when you factor in everything. This one idea (separating the cost of HGV driving) is a but a fraction of the misallocated costs.
Our entire society is structured around the abusrity of a one size fits all road system. Everyone tends to work around the same times, and on the same days, and with consideration of nothing but time to arrival because all rational factors are removed.
A free market would naturally fix costs through the price of damage, but also through increased costs for driving in busy times, or for most popular routes. People would actually have to factor in what they are taking instead of jam packing themselves onto the roads. Which would of course mean more rationa lallocation of roads, and the ability to build and improve the road system based upon demand and not how long someone has been begging a council for a bypass.
Also, both toll and tracking are silly ideas. You'd need to pay for a single driving scheme that covers you for a few hundred road brands, and to have a simple identification system that is checked as you pass into a road and which doesn't identify the driver, only his right to drive.
There is nothing monopolistic about roads, if the road you take is inadequate, you can take a hellicopter. It's not rocket science.
@Captain Ranty:
Is it really that much of a strain to work it out? It's all the state ever does, and has ever done, and it's very purpose of existing, and still people sound suprised!
The PURPOSE of the State is to extract money. If a Government program costs more than the individuals who enacted it get (An average of 85% to the Government, 15% on the programs to keep us from questioning the taking of the money) then it's a failed progam, and NO government program fails in it's actual intended purpose... to take as much money as possible while spending as small amount as possible on making people dependant on them.
If we reduced Road Tax so that it took in as much as they spent on roads, then there'd be no need for the tax... obviously! By definition, anything the Government can do could be done at least as badly by a free market in which every single person chooses to give a single company a Monopoly over every service. So, like ALL Taxes, there are no benefits.
@Capn Ranty... Slight quibble, the £42billion is from all motoring taxes (VED, fuel duty, VAT on fuel and vehicles etc) not just from VED.
In the UK we get just about the worst value for money - approx 25% of the total tax take gets returned to "transport" - which includes subsidies to rail companies and the like. The best is the USA (it might have changed since The Messiah took over though) where it used to be 100% return, France and Germany are >50% (I'm not in the UK at the moment so don't have the actual figures to hand) and it certainly shows!
As for tolls, maybe not such an awful idea if they can be collected securely and "invisibly" - I sat in a 15 mile queue of traffic the other day waiting to get through the final toll booths on the A7/E15 on the France/Spain border - I can't imagine how awful the congestion would be in our cramped and relatively road-starved little island if we used "traditional" tolling.
"And why is there no option for other roads?"
Park on one side of the road, which is behind a big hill with a motorway on it. Graveyard, schools and housing on the other, literally nowhere to build. Lots of one way streets and dead end junctions around the area make it almost impossible to go around it.
And before you say "AHA turn those one way streets and dead ends into another road", do you really think that if the resisdents that lived there had that choice they would allow their quite streets to become a thoroughfare?
"If the roads were privately owned and there was a contractual understanding of things like data privacy, I wouldn't have any problem with it."
Oh pull the other one obo, it's got bells on it.
You know it will only be a matter of time till one of the goverments passes a law that gives the police access to this info for fighting either the endless "war on drugs or terror or (insert other)".
"It's also quite possible to have a single disk or card or whatever that allows you to use a wide variety of roads at different times without paying a toll explicitly, and the owners of these roads get a share of some communal pot based on usage."
And how exactly do you know the toll for each road you are about to go on, who owns it etc.
Can you imigain planning a 20 mile journy using side roads, where their may be several different routes with different prices.
It can certinally work for certain roads (motorways), but it just turns into one big clusterfuck on a small local level.
Thinking actually about your disk i can see "price bands" and colour coding for roads making it easier to plan.
But you won't ever convince me on the privacy front, I'd rather not spend my time looking over my shoulder as to who is tracking my movements, i just don't trust private companies to not abuse the info, or goverments not to use underhand tactics to steal it.
"You know it will only be a matter of time till one of the goverments passes a law that gives the police access to this info for fighting either the endless "war on drugs or terror or (insert other)"."
You forget I'm an anarchist. If I had my druthers, there'd be no government, and if there was a government, I'd certainly agree with you.
But there's no way a government would butt out of transport, so I'm basing my thoughts on an anarchist model, not a government-based road-pricing model.
"And how exactly do you know the toll for each road you are about to go on, who owns it etc."
It depends, but if you bought a "road use disk", it could be up to operators to keep anonymized data to divvy up the pot whenever they do so. They would have no particular interest in knowing anything about you, they would only be interested in the type of vehicle and weight to charge you for use.
There are whole books discussing the issues of free-market road pricing and use, if you want to delve into specifics, I'd start with one of those.
Anon: Then don't give them the information. "Private" isn't a thing. If you don't trust people to have that information, don't provide it. You're welcome to buy your own roads, or use anonymous toll roads if there is demand, or use roads that don't require personal information.
Your comments aren't arguments against Private ownership of roads, they're arguments against giving those private owners information you don't want them to have.
Why not just spend the money the Government rip-off from the motorist on the fucking roads in the first place, simples!!!
@OBO "It depends, but if you bought a "road use disk", it could be up to operators to keep anonymized data to divvy up the pot whenever they do so. They would have no particular interest in knowing anything about you, they would only be interested in the type of vehicle and weight to charge you for use."
Yeah....
Right.
So, like the Post Office and the Banks etc, they'd sell on your data for purely altruistic reasons then?
Half of you are discussing what could be done under your own ideal system of government.
The other half are discussing why that could never work under our existing system.
Road pricing is the least of your disagreements.
"Anon: Then don't give them the information. "Private" isn't a thing. If you don't trust people to have that information, don't provide it. "
For it to work you would need tracking devices, either numberplate recognition on the roads, or a chip in your car (major roads may have manned toll boths).
If it's numberplate recognition, then they track you.
If it's a chip, then they will likely know who you are so they know who to send the bill to.
Don't see any way around that.
"Half of you are discussing what could be done under your own ideal system of government."
Discussing how this could work under an anarchic state in the UK is about as realistic as discussing how we would be governed by alien overlords.
governed by alien overlords
You mean we're not?? Good luck convincing me of that one...
"Don't see any way around that."
I can. And there's probably ways that it can be worked around that I can't think of, because we'd be in a different situation.
So, you can scratch that concern from the list. ;o)
Anonymous: Is that meant to be a joke? Your argument against the free market is that you can't come up with the solution that freedom will discover, right here and right now? Good thing no one had to presuppose Ford's discovery of the assembly line before he was allowed to try, or it wouldn't exist.
If there is a problem, then I am sure you want to fix it? If you believe there is a solution, then one can be found. If you don't, then that still isn't an argument against Anarchy, because no one will find the solution.
For example, a quick off the head, obvious solution because there are an infinite number, NOT 2; would be to have non-Unique identification on the car that was recognised by an overhead camera. Or alternatively, without a Police Force, the Number plate or it's future replacement will associate you only with the company you buy road access from, so it can easily be verified, without the actual road ever being able to get information about you.
Just obvious solutions. Nothing validates using violence to get your way.
"I can."
You can, ok?
Care to sharebear?
"Good thing no one had to presuppose Ford's discovery of the assembly line before he was allowed to try, or it wouldn't exist."
WTF does a new manufacturing method have to do with the discussion of my private movements being tracked and logged?
"For example, a quick off the head, obvious solution because there are an infinite number, NOT 2; would be to have non-Unique identification on the car that was recognised by an overhead camera.”
Is this a joke, the solution my movements being logged is a tracking number, that ermmm how ehaha.
What?
I’m asking for you to demonstrate a method that doesn’t log and record my movements due to the obvious privacy issues, not one that does.
“Or alternatively, without a Police Force, the Number plate or it's future replacement will associate you only with the company you buy road access from, so it can easily be verified, without the actual road ever being able to get information about you."
So your other brilliant solution to tracking, is that I have a code that is logged with a private company, this ermm prevents ahaha tracking how?…
What?
Come up with a way of paying tolls automatically, that doesn’t log my movements, and that can be enforced.
Then well talk.
"Come up with a way of paying tolls automatically, that doesn’t log my movements, and that can be enforced."
You pay, to some central collector, an annual sum of money. The owners of all the roads then duke it out for their share of the pot, which can be done via simple weight sensors, like what fire traffic lights.
"Then well talk."
Can we talk now?
Obo, cmon.
What you are describing is worse than what we have, one large central bureaucracy that will charge everyone a flat fee regardless if they do 10 or 100 miles.
At least fuel duty is based on your milage.
And being one large bureaucracy it will have all the faults that this sytem has.
There's no pleasing you, is there?
This is exactly why I feel justified in ignoring people who ask me to explain how something might work in an anarchist society.
There's always some fucking thing that's not good enough, so that means the whole idea is totally without merit, while completely ignoring the fact that we have loads of issues with the current system.
And then there's the wilful misunderstanding: there won't be one giant bureaucracy because there won't be a state. There will be private operators of private resources.
I'm not a fucking road pricing expert, I have come up with one possible way that means you retain anonymity and the roads are privately held. I'm quite sure that there are other ways of doing this, probably better ways, too.
But straight off the top of my head I came up with something that allows fully private ownership of roads AND fully anonymous travel and all you can do is carp about something irrelevant.
Make a useful argument or fuck off.
Cunt.
“There's no pleasing you, is there?”
No, your just inadequate at pleasing others, don’t worry honey plenty of other people suck as well.
“This is exactly why I feel justified in ignoring people who ask me to explain how something might work in an anarchist society.”
Yawn
“There's always some fucking thing that's not good enough, so that means the whole idea is totally without merit, while completely ignoring the fact that we have loads of issues with the current system.”
Who’s ignoring anything.
You know what they say assuming does don’t you.
“And then there's the wilful misunderstanding: there won't be one giant bureaucracy because there won't be a state. There will be private operators of private resources.”
YOU just described a system that would have a large central bureaucracy, I didn’t wilfully misunderstand anything.
You can’t be bothered to explain it in detail, so don’t whine like a little baby when people don’t fill in your blanks correctly.
“I'm not a fucking road pricing expert, I have come up with one possible way that means you retain anonymity and the roads are privately held. I'm quite sure that there are other ways of doing this, probably better ways, too.”
Maybe there is a way, but if you don’t want to come across as the a-typical dum pot head anarchist, don’t just say “I’m sure” it will all work out when you have no fucking clue how it could work.
“But straight off the top of my head I came up with something that allows fully private ownership of roads AND fully anonymous travel and all you can do is carp about something irrelevant.”
Pointing out it’s a shit overly bureaucratic system is irrelevant, lollers.
OK, you tell me how it will be overly bureaucratic?
@Anon: How do you not leave in a state of constant fear? If you're not "sure" Anarchy works you must worry so much!
See, "I'm sure" that so long as I pay for it, my food will be grown and delivered to a shop where I can buy it, without anybody threatening people. You however believe you can't be "sure" that an obvious need for something will be provided.
Solution to anonymous roads? Drive on completely unmaintained roads that anyone can drive on. Problem solved. There are even ways this could work positively, though I wouldn't want the system, if people were able to fix the road themselves it would likely get done.
However, imagining up some evil anti-privacy culture, even if it was real, doesn't validate the far worse state. So what if freedom means a giant Beauracratic mess? It's at least better than the government, and not an argument against freedom.
Road pricing is probably inevitable - not least as the current 'car tax disc' system has been perverted by Nu Lab to apply in ways that bear no relation to the relative cost of road use.
As an example, it is generally agreed that road surface damage caused by a vehicle is proportional to the fourth power of that vehicle's weight applied through each axle. So a vehicle twice as heavy does 16 times as much damage to the road surface.
Why then does a goods vehicle weighing up to 3,500 kg cost ~£125 to tax pa, whilst a 4x4 (weight generally 2000-4000kg) costs up to £950 pa, and a 44,000kg truck between £1250 & £1850?
Still have deep misgivings about the administration of road pricing - someone, somewhere is going to know every drivers' movements around the roads - especially when combined with the ANPR network.
Finally, even with road pricing - which will require a huge investment and maintenance budget, I'd be surprised to see the disappearance of the tax disc & fuel duties, levied in some form or other.
It could be argued that the punitive levels of duty/tax on fuel is a pretty effective form of road pricing right now - the 'free riders' being those HGV drivers who enter the country with massive fuel reserves on board. And cyclists!
"OK, you tell me how it will be overly bureaucratic?"
If you make it a central pot, where is the free market?
The central pot holder says "this is how much i pay, take it or leave it", the road owner then takes it, or ends up taking tolls some other route.
What route?
Manned or barriers just add to the pain, other pots?
How do you make it "fair". As in i drive 10 miles, you drive 100 miles, we both pay the same money into the pot.
How do you make it free market / anonymous and enforceable, and ensure that you pay for what you travel, not more, not less.
I have an open mind on this, really.
but you can't be bothered to explain a system in any detail and instead throw a childish hissy fit.
Bit hard to take it seriously really isnt it?
@james
"So what if freedom means a giant Beauracratic mess? It's at least better than the government, and not an argument against freedom."
You may argue that i am being all foil hatted for being so concerned about keeping my travel concerns anonymous, if so, ok. But i don't really equate {my movements being tracked = freedom}.
Other than that you don't really add much other than to say "drive on the shite roads lol".
The central money collector can just be a committee made up of all the people who own roads. It doesn't have to be a separate body. Or it can be an outsourced administration function.
Simple.
There is NO GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT AT ALL.
Obo, Anon, check out how the railways organised fare sharing for through journeys - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Clearing_House.
"The central money collector can just be a committee made up of all the people who own roads. It doesn't have to be a separate body. Or it can be an outsourced administration function.
Simple. "
Obo chap, cmon.
I could sit here and poke holes in that all day, but what's the point.
All you will do is answer with a paragraph without going into any detail and we'll go round in circles again.
If you wan't to convince people of your view, you really need to come up with something abit more detailed and robust, and be preparred to counter argue.
But then every anarchist i've ever met always falls back onto the "just because i can't think of a system doesnt mean it can't work".
"I could sit here and poke holes in that all day, but what's the point."
How?
been away.
"Come up with a way of paying tolls automatically, that doesn’t log my movements, and that can be enforced."
The collective central pot thing loses half the advantage - that some roads are cheaper than others to use.
OK, so to address Anon's worries.
Use a stored-value system like an Oyster card, but longer range, run (say) by Tollco. You pass a roadside beacon when entering a stretch of road. It sends a message saying, "credit road-owner, debit Tollco": you have permission to be on the road. If no valid payment message received, it triggers an ANPR camera. You are now on private property without permission, so your movements are fair game. Don't want to be tracked? Keep your credit up with Tollco. Should be several competing Tollcos. Most roads and most cars will use most of the systems, occasionally you'll come across a road that doesn't take any system you've got credit with and your satnav will beep red devil noises so you take another route.
Come to think of it, TomTom and Garmin are likely to be in the TollCo market.
Companies will fit a SpyTollCo system in their cars, to see what their reps are up to. Or, use your own car. Want to claim the road fee on expenses? use the SpyTollCo system/the company's credit. Being a bit freelance? use your own TollCo credit.
Worried about route planning? Price is just an extra layer of data for your satnav system.
All doable with today's technology; no big database or citizen-tracking is needed.
Post a Comment