Every day, students deal with traffic jams on their way to FAU, and government road-ownership is to blame.

When the government controls the supply of something (in this case, road space), there will be drastic shortages, because it underprices that good.

The best way to provide enough road space is to stop using legally stolen money (taxes) to fund Spanish River, Glades, US1, I-95, etc., and turn the roads over to the private sector.

Think of it like this: If shop-owner Joe drops his prices to zero, his supply runs out, he loses money and his business shuts down.

Jan, a competitor, can buy Joe’s remaining assets (buildings, tools, equipment, etc.), hire his laid off workers and open a new shop selling the same product. Jan can price her stuff and make a profit by buying a steady supply to sell to her customers.

If she charges more than her competitors, she risks losing customers. If she under-charges, however, she goes out of business like Joe. If she and her competitors try raising their prices, they risk losing profits to new competitors with lower prices.

There is a sustainable, steady supply of stuff for customers when competition exist. These are the simplified basics of supply,  prices and demand in a free market.

Government-owned roads operate like Joe’s shop. They have a supply shortage, but they never shut down.

COMPETITION = MORE,  BETTER, CHEAPER

Many people don’t believe this, but the more free the market, the is more supply exists at lower prices.

Currently, roads are monopolized by the government, but other industries have shown that private sector competition makes things cheaper in formerly monopolized industries.

According to the article “Duopolistic Competition in Cable Television” from the Yale Journal on Regulation, cable companies offered more channels at cheaper prices when there was more competition.

That national study found cities with competing cable companies pay 23 percent less than cities with a cable monoply.

This model could be applied to roads, as it shows what happens when different suppliers enter the market: Supply rises, price drops – especially in formerly government-controlled markets. The same thing can happen with roads, highways, bridges, boulevards, avenues and whatever. Add some competition and road maintenance costs will drop, while supply will rise.

WHY ROADS SUCK

When government has a monopolistic control over supply, it’s not punished or rewarded like Joe, Jan or any private firm. Consequently, customers will get screwed.

Government keeps its prices at zero, and therefore loses money. But it uses money it forces out of people to make up for that loss.

It’s punished if it tries to put a price on its supplies. What politician would support pricing stuff government gives free-of-charge (using stolen money)?

The result: Perpetual shortage.

Traffic jams are inevitable when the government owns the roads.

FIXING ROADS

Since the best way to clear up roads would be letting the private sector handle them, this is how privatization and private roads could work:

First, to answer the objectors of privatization, here’s a potential downside: Some companies may put out a crappy “good” (in this case roads). The good news: The company would lose money for their terrible service and get replaced by a more efficient business—just like any business not supported by the government.

The easiest way to privatize is through auction. Roads could be put up for bid, and the highest non-government bidder will get them.

Bidders needn’t necessarily be companies. Citizens, neighborhood groups, homeowners associations, etc. could bid on streets running through their turf.

For-profit companies wouldn’t bother with small, less profitable roads. Neighborhood people, however, could. They could collect dues from residents to maintain the streets. Costs per resident would be lower than they are now in densely populated places, and higher in sparsely populated places.

For-profit highways would likely have toll-booths to collect money.

Non-highway roads, like Glades, wouldn’t have toll-booths since they’d slow down traffic and put companies out of business. Companies could, however, use road cameras to photograph license plates, find drivers’ addresses and deliver bills. Richer road companies might use SunPass-style scanners.

A freed road market would force road access prices down. Costs per person would be cheaper than they are now, when the government steals money from property owners and gasoline sellers.

Neighborhood roads could be owned by the people living in those neighborhoods. They could set up cameras and charge drivers, too. Those that want no traffic can charge higher prices for non-residents.

Private roads can become crowded, but that’s not a problem. It will show how well the company serves drivers. When demand becomes higher than supply, those companies will do what any company would: Increase supply.

This can mean road widening, double-decking, carpool/vanpool/bus discounts, express lanes and other methods that haven’t been tried.

They’ve had no chance because of the government’s road monopoly. Thanks to that, students are forced to put up with the congested Glades, Spanish River, US1 and I-95 that politicians and bureaucrats subject them to. Students can’t choose the best of many great options.