Economics is Fun, Part 11: Competition

[Peter1469]

That the levies don't protect against every flood is a given. The "free market levies " would be non-existent and provide zero protection 100% of the time.

[Peter1469]

This is what I posted above.

"Levies and flood dams have not prevented flooding or flood damage. They just provide the perception to some that they are protected and maybe a reason to pay for the losses. The free market wouldn't have people building homes where tax payers are sure to have to pick up the tab for the losses."

Two posters have suggested those words aren't true. But they absolutely are. Do I have to show evidence of the floods that happened last year, or the year before, or the year before that. I've been going to Grenada Lake, a flood control lake off the Mississippi River near Grenada, Mississippi for 40 years and have watched some flooding in that town almost every one of those years.

Government providing levees that prevented flooding might be a good thing. But when they don't prevent floods they provides us with an obligation to pay for the damage caused. If levees are what's needed for entrepreneurs to profit from the "delta" of the Mississippi then they'd figure it out, or a better solution.

Let me know when you discover your libertarian utopia.

[Peter1469]

Along rivers, yes, in flood zones? Flood zones make good farming land.

And good land for population control via drowning.

BTW, where is the libertarian utopia these days? Other than in my dreams?

[Stoney]

Let me know when you discover your libertarian utopia.

You need to try F & I. Your willingness and ability to formulate a reasoned response would fit right in.

[Chris]

And good land for population control via drowning.

BTW, where is the libertarian utopia these days? Other than in my dreams?

Arguing with oxymorons is weak.