if consumer demand should increase for the goods or services of any private business, the private firm is delighted; it woos and welcomes the new business and expands its operations eagerly to fill the new orders. Government, in contrast, generally meets this situation by sourly urging or even ordering consumers to “buy” less, and allows shortages to develop, along with deterioration in the quality of its service. Thus, the increased consumer use of government streets in the cities is met by aggravated traffic congestion and by continuing denunciations and threats against people who drive their own cars. The New York City administration, for example, is continually threatening to outlaw the use of private cars in Manhattan, where congestion has been most troublesome. It is only government, of course, that would ever think of bludgeoning consumers in this way; it is only government that has the audacity to “solve” traffic congestion by forcing private cars (or trucks or taxis or whatever) off the road. According to this principle, of course, the “ideal” solution to traffic congestion is simply to outlaw all vehicles! But this sort of attitude toward the consumer is not confined to traffic on the streets. New York City, for example, has suffered periodically from a water “shortage.” Here is a situation where, for many years, the city government has had a compulsory monopoly of the supply of water to its citizens. Failing to supply enough water, and failing to price that water in such a way as to clear the market, to equate supply and demand (which private enterprise does automatically), New York’s response to water shortages has always been to blame not itself, but the consumer, whose sin has been to use “too much” water. The city administration could only react by outlawing the sprinkling of lawns, restricting use of water, and demanding that people drink less water. In this way, government transfers its own failings to the scapegoat user, who is threatened and bludg

Why are there interstate highways in Hawaii?

The highways are crowded with people who drive as if their sole purpose in getting behind the wheel is to avenge every wrong done them by man, beast or fate. The only thing that keeps them in line is their fear of death, jail and lawsuits.

Traffic is thick, so my urge to gun the car, to feel the freedom of this temporary independence, is stymied by the congestion at every intersection. I look up through the windshield at the bruised sky, hoping it won’t rain.

I'm not against the government building roads. That is a legitimate government function. But I am very much against the government claiming that their building the road is the reason somebody on the road is successful.

Protection against this general monopoly is as difficult as protection against pollution. People will face a danger that threatens their own self-interest but not one that threatens society as a whole. Many more people are against cars than are against driving them. They are against cars because they pollute and because they monopolize traffic. They drive cars
because they consider the pollution created by one car insignificant, and because they do not feel personally deprived of freedom when they drive. It is also difficult to be protected against monopoly when a society is already littered with roads, schools, or hospitals, when independent action has been paralyzed for so long that the ability for it seems to have atrophied, and when simple alternatives seem beyond the reach of the imagination. Monopoly is hard to get 4d of when it has frozen not
only the shape of the physical world but also the range of behavior and of imagination. Radical monopoly is generally discovered only when it is too late.

What are you so mad about? That we still have a government? We still have “traffic lights.” We’re sorry. The government’s not perfect, but some people wish it was better, not gone.

It is like sitting in a traffic jam on the San Diego Freeway with your windows rolled up and Portuguese music booming out of the surround-sound speakers while animals gnaw on your neck and diseased bill collectors hammer on your doors with golf clubs.

Because it is a monopoly, government brings inefficiency and stagnation to most things it runs; government agencies pursue the inflation of their budgets rather than the service of their customers; pressure groups form an unholy alliance with agencies to extract more money from taxpayers for their members. Yet despite all this, most clever people still call for government to run more things and assume that if it did so, it would somehow be more perfect, more selfless, next time.

L'industrie du transport façonne son produit : l'usage. Chassé du monde où les personnes sont douées d'autonomie, il a aussi perdu l'impression de se trouver au centre du monde. Il a conscience de manque de plus en plus de temps, bien qu'il utilise chaque jour la voiture, le train, l'autobus, le métro et l'ascenseur, le tout pour franchir en moyenne trente kilomètres, souvent dans un rayon de moins de dix kilomètres. Le sol se dérobe sous ses pieds, il est cloué à la roue. Qu'il prenne le métro ou l'avion, il a toujours le sentiment d'avancer moins vite ou moins bien que les autres et il est jaloux des raccourcis qu'empruntent les privilégiés pour échapper à l'exaspération créée par la circulation. Enchaîné à l'horaire de son train de banlieue, il rêve d'avoir une auto. Épuisé par les embouteillages aux heures de pointe, il envie le riche qui se déplace à contre-sens. Il paie sa voiture de sa poche, mais il sait trop bien que le PDG utilise les voitures de l'entreprise, fait passer son essence dans les frais généraux ou se fait louer une voiture sans bourse délier. L'usager se trouve tout au bas de l'échelle où sans cesse augmentent l'inégalité, le manque de temps et sa propre impuissance, mais pour y mettre fin il s'accroche à l'espoir fou d'obtenir plus de la même chose : une circulation améliorée par des transports plus rapides. Il réclame des améliorations techniques des véhicules, des voies de circulation et des horaires ; ou bien il appelle de ses vœux une révolution qui organise des transports publics rapides en nationalisant les moyens de transport. Jamais il ne calcule le prix qu'il lui en coûtera pour être ainsi véhiculé dans un avenir meilleur. Il oublie que de toute accélération supplémentaire il payera lui-même la facture, sous forme d'impôts directs ou de taxes multiples. Il ne mesure pas le coût indirect du remplacement des voitures privées par des transports publics aussi rapides. Il est incapable d'imaginer les avantages apportés par l'abandon de l'

Will the highways on the Internet become more few?

The traffic inside her head seemed to have stopped believing in traffic lights. The result was incessant noise, a few bad crashes and eventually gridlock.

Big, centralized government, with the proliferation of federal bureaucracies and the expansion of public welfare programs, is sometimes said to have undercut the mediating institutions of civil society, “crowded out” private generosity, and sapped individual initiative. This is a common explanation among conservative commentators, who attribute the reversal from we to I in the 1960s to the welfare state.16 Empirical evidence for “crowding out” is modest, for across states in the US and across countries in the world, the correlation between big government and social solidarity appears to be, if anything, faintly positive, not negative.

Always take the high road, it's far less crowded.