[ExI] Americans are poor drivers
painlord2k at libero.it
Sat Jul 11 15:09:26 UTC 2009
Stathis Papaioannou ha scritto:
> 2009/7/9 Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com>:
>> ### Are you asking if I would buy these shares in an initial public
> No, that would be a quite different situation. The shares are issued
> to everyone for free, with the option of voting to change the
> structure so that they can be sold and accumulated. You assume that
> the shareholders would vote to do this, and maybe they would. But they
> might also choose to leave things as they are, just as voters choose
> to leave some assets and organisations in public control and to
> privatise others. Now I understand that you think privatising
> everything is for the best, and perhaps you also think that left to
> their own devices people will decide to do just that. But what should
> be done if, foolishly, they choose to keep some things communally
Obviously nothing, if they really want this.
The problems arises when they have no option about it.
In the example of city street privately owned, there are limits to how
much the owners of the street could charge to use the street.
First, people could choose to limit as much as possible the use of
street owned by the greedy capitalist. This would imply that the greedy
capitalist would have the same costs but less revenues.
Second, people could leave the city and go doing their business in
another place, where there are less greedy capitalists owning streets.
This would leave the greedy capitalist owner of the streets without
clients and with fixed costs.
Third, the people could retaliate against the greedy capitalist and
prevent him and his minions from using any and all building facing to
his streets. No shopping, not eating, no hospital, etc.
In between they could build a second network of streets underground or
overground. Then we could discuss how much the ownership of a road give
right over the underground and the overground.
More information about the extropy-chat