Scott Adams, author of the Dilbert comic strip, had some interesting observations regarding subsidies and taxes that different bodied people avoid and pay.
The gist of it can be seen in his all-you-can-eat buffet example: those with smaller appetites essentially subsidize those with larger appetites. The same concept could be therefore applied to a myriad of other goods and services, which are erroneously apportioned according to a “universal” flat-rate.
The flaws of numerous contemporary issues can be illustrated in a similar manner, including network neutrality. For instance, in Japan, low-usage customers end up subsidizing the bill of customers that consume large amounts of bandwidth. Interestingly enough, due to the “virtual” traffic jams that occur during peak times, the Japanese telecom regulatory body is now looking at implementing a more efficient “non-neutral,” variable-rate policy.
See also: Harrison Bergeron and Egalitarianism: A Revolt Against Nature
{ 8 comments }
And quincunx says he honestly doesn’t understand how the interstate highway system subsidizes big corporations over local businesses….
I understand how it could, and PROBABLY does, but I just haven’t been presented with the numerical or even logical (when all facts are considered) evidence of how it does!
I would think companies like fedex and ups would eliminate that advantage.
banker,
Are you referring to the previous two comments?
If so, how does that explain WMT being one of the largest trucking companies in the U.S.?
Why wouldn’t they be using FDX or UPS ? Charitable implulses? Altruistic tendencies?
Proudhon,
The problem with your assertion is that it assumes that road usage is assessed an overall flat fee for each mile. This is clearly not the case since much of the tax support for the system comes from gasoline/diesel, and large heavy trucks use significantly more fuel than the passenger vehicles per mile. In addition, trucking is assessed special fees and taxes that vary from state to state, but that do single them out vs passenger vehicles.
Like quincunx, I might believe that corporations are subsidized by interstate highways being public goods, but I have yet to see any real evidence that supports the assertion.
Yancey: my mom has worked in transportation engineering for ~25 years and according to her, if you look at the amount paid by large trucks vs. cars, “the trucks never cover the cost of their damage”, and the trucking lobby does all it can to keep that from happening. And that’s without counting the non-monetary cost of the hassle of having large, slow moving, slow-accelerating, smelly vehicles make it a pain for other drivers. Where I live, about every day, three of the them form a wall across all three freeway lanes, keeping anyone from passing.
Nevertheless, I think the above misses the point. A state-provided good is a hindrance. It’s quite absurd to view it a subsidy. People make their decisions based on how things are. The adapt to the situation. Successful businesses aren’t that way because they *happened* to have capital goods that interface well with a poorly-run system. They *chose* the capital goods, *given* that poorly run system. Under any other system, they would buy the appropriate capital goods, and still clean your clocks.
Pierre’s argument reminds me of that of the fantasy-game-obsessed teen: “Man, if only we lived in the days of knights and castles, *then* I could get girls to like me!” No, the reason you can’t get a date is because other people adapt to reality better than you, and that would hold even if everyone were in medieval times.
Trucking companies may appear to get a break, and some of their ‘savings’ are passed onto their customers. Since small/medium/big businesses can all take advantage of this, one still needs to see evidence that it is disproportionate among them.
A truck can deliver items to a supercenter just as easily as a group of merchants in a strip mall.
—
Your case would be a simple to figure out if every company actually did their own shipping. But because we have something like a market, we have specialization, and so the advantages can be spread to all. The key is how equal is it among the customers of the advantaged? As long as there is an Economic Calculation problem I doubt it could be done accurately.
A word about trucks, highways, and subsidies. Here in NJ, there are two parallel highways that cover the span between Wilmington Delaware and Bordentown NJ – I-295 and I-95, which in that section is the New Jersey Turnpike. I drive the Turnpike every day because it is smoother and faster. As far as I know (of course I know it is probably not the case) I am paying the actual cost of the wear and tear my car inflicts upon the highway, its capital cost having been amortized years ago. But curiously, the turnpike is full of trucks, including the trucks belonging to the infamous WMT. So I ask, are highways really that big a subsidy, if even WMT is willing to pay extra to ride the NJTPK? Or, in the long run, does everybody get what they pay for? (I am playing devil’s advocate here).
Comments on this entry are closed.