6 ms·
This is basically the definition of something that should be subsidized. Same story for public education, health care, clean drinking water, etc
by andrew_lettuce 12d ago
This is basically the definition of something that should be subsidized. Same story for public education, health care, clean drinking water, etc
- Mawr 12d agoWe need energy, therefore we should subsidize coal plants.
- abenga 12d agoThose others have far fewer externalities than burning diesel to move heavy trucks.
- wat10000 12d agoDifferent kind of "everyone benefits from it." There's "individual people benefit when they pay for themselves and everyone does this" and then there's "everyone benefits from each individual receiving it." Public education etc. is the second one: we all as a society benefit when little Timmy gets educated, so we subsidize it in order to maximize that benefit. Transportation of goods is the first kind. I and all of my neighbors benefit from it, but we each benefit individually. When Bob down the street indirectly pays a few dollars to have some item transported to a store by truck, that doesn't benefit me at all. Likewise Bob doesn't benefit from my usage. "Everyone benefits" just because it's ubiquitous. In economics terms, you want to subsidize things with positive externalities, because they'd otherwise be used less than the most efficient amount. I don't think trucking has positive externalities. It definitely has negative externalities, which would be an argument for taxing it (which of course we already do in various ways) rather than subsidizing it.
- JKCalhoun 12d agoNot when subsidizing it prevents us addressing the bigger problem. Subsidize electric trucks, subsidize using cargo trains for 99% of the transportation of goods instead.