Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11294cars nonconvivial?

Expand Messages
  • Serge
    Nov 1, 2004
      --- In CarFree@yahoogroups.com, De Clarke <de@u...> wrote:

      > in an earlier post Serge challenge the idea that the automobile was a
      > nonconvivial (non-vulgarisable, diminishing-returns) technology, and
      > that it is streets and parking lots that are the nonconvivial
      > I didn't have time or energy to respond at the time, but this
      strikes me as
      > absurd. the car, the road (as we now know it) and the parking lot,
      are all
      > part of *one* technology: the private automobile paradigm. take
      away the
      > cars and the infrastructure would be radically different. it's all one
      > package, and the demand for parking and roadway space that the
      private auto
      > generates is part of what makes it nonconvivial: if you get enough
      > in cars demanding to occupy large amounts of space (in motion or at
      > you start to run out of space, both for more-people-in-cars and for
      > not-in-cars.

      Yes, it is true that cars and the facilities for them (roads,
      parking lots) can be viewed as one technology, but they are not
      one and the same.

      Consider if movie theaters were made "public" (like our roads) and
      paid for through taxes. Going to the movies would be "free".
      Can you picture the lines, the crowds, the congestion?

      Obviously, if you take away the cars the infrastructure would be
      radically different. But it would also be radically different if
      all roads had tolls, and toll prices were based on congestion.

      Imagine if tolls were priced like airline ticket prices. If you
      plan your trip in advance, you can purchase discount road
      reservations, while they are available. Last minute Thanksgiving
      trip? It's going to cost you a small fortune (but, the road will
      not be congested).

      Also note that as long as cost is not an object and parking prices
      are not regulated, you can always find a place to park.

      So it's not the cars per se that are nonconvivial - it's their
      usage, and, in particular, the unnaturally low marginal cost of
      usage that makes them appear to be nonconvivial. Indeed, if
      no one ever used a car there would be no issue at all. And
      if road users were not protected from paying the true costs
      of road usage on every trip, and actually had to pay the true
      market costs of such usage, these costs would suppress car usage
      to a convivial level.

    • Show all 8 messages in this topic