Hi! I am new to this forum, but I have been reading from Mises.org for the last few months. I am currently studying the Austrian School and thought I would post a few, out of the many questions I have, on this forum as I study.
If entrepreneur, in the economic sense, is the action of attempting to cope with uncertain future conditions and price discrepancies then can the state be entrepreneurial in role? For example, the roads in the United States. The government has no wealth and in turn must tax the people in order to create the roads, therefore transfering wealth to a less efficient sector; however, the government is creating these roads in anticipation of future benefits or the necessity of such roads. Is it possible that the government of one country be considered an "entrepreneur", in the economic sense, in the world of countries?
If individuals or companies decide to set up roads, how would they get a return on their investments besides tolls (since setting up tolls on every road is not very attractive)? I did not have as much difficulty understanding in terms of the US railroad system but hit a roadblock when I put the thought into roads. This is just an example, but if others can clarify better it would be very helpful.
Thank you in advance!
I'm sure private road companies would find ways to collect money, that we would not be able to know about, since they do not exist. =]
No. Look up articles on Mises.org on whether the government can be run as a business. Even if it competes in the market, it will still have to extract funds to get the venture going, and once it's competing as a private firm (e.g. founds the post office, then throws it into the market to compete), any arguments for government intervention wither away anyway. Otherwise, it does not work based on the profit motive that entrepreneurs do, seeing as it is not risking its own wealth in any sense, and it may even face calculation problems if it monopolizes an industry under its control, meaning its calculations will be off (this is a matter of degree; the more industries it monopolizes, the worse it becomes.)
On roads, see this great post by Ultima. It's a reiteration of what libertarian thinkers have at some junctures said. However, be sure to look up Walter Block's article on roads (it should be on the Praxeology reading list in the Economics section.)
To darkness I condemn you...
to answer your particular quewstion about incomes generating from roads. The technology to monitor cars driving on a road, and electronic charge them is already available. Hence one can toll roads without roadblocks and the like. road owners could earn incomes from roadside advertising. and road owners that own the land or buildings either side of their roads could sell or rent out floorspace for businesses, part of the rent would be towards keeping the road in good condition and subsidised so that customers are inclined to visit.
the more general question about government entrepeneurship can be answered by understanding that its an oxymoron. George Reisman has a wonderful explanation of how government spending is always to be classed as Consumption spending, and is never Productive , since the activities it engages in are not for the purpose of inreasing the difference between its sales receipts and its costs
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Government industries also have little incentive to attempt being efficient, and actually have incentive to be costinefficient because it justifies, in the bureaucrat's eyes, giving it more money. Amtrak has a billion dollar margin of error that it recieves from the government regularly and has lost money almost every year of its existance.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap