> > >goods.
>
>Justin Schwartz:
> > That's what makes 'em public--indivisuals will nor provide the on their
>own
> > because it's rational to free-ride.
>
>Many public goods are not susceptible to free riding, so that
>can't be the fundamental problem which requires the coercion
>you think is necessary. The post office is one example.
Sure I can. Say I don't pay thetaxes that support it. Public goods are _defined_ as those which can't be provoded by individuals acting in their rational self interest because it's rational to free ride. I gave you a short list: the post office. Roads. Trains. Universal education. Universal health care. It's a long list.
>I suppose anarchy appears Hobbesian to you because you believe
>in Hobbes's view of humans.
Not at all. But I think if you put individuals into aHobbesean situation they will be have as Hobbes deswcribed. It will make them Hobbesean. I am more Rousseaan/Hegelian: the state civils us a new nature, it can make civilized and free, subject only to the law that we give to ourselves.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com