So, there was basically a glaring hole in the logic of the article, and I was wondering if there's anyone else here that can answer it for me....
Garbage is already a big externality. A positive one. The government takes care of hauling away your trash and disposing of it, somewhere, and you get to benefit from the economies of scale of centralizing this.
The truly individualist, libertarian thing to do with your garbage is not to leave it on the curb for the government to pick up. It's to bury it in your backyard.
What's that you say? "Not in my back yard"?
I had a couple actual questions buried in the snark. Is it still legal to bury trash in your own back yard, on your own property, assuming you take the necessary precautions to prevent it from seeping into groundwater? And if so, would you - or the article's author - do so?
And if someone wanted to start a garbage collection corporation, using land they own, that they've lined so it doesn't leech into groundwater, and hauling away garbage with their own trucks, would the government stop them? I don't think so, but I dunno if it's ever been tried. I think that they'd quickly find out that skipping every other house on the block because they aren't a customer isn't very cost-effective, instead.
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to externalize costs back onto the population if they initially came from the population. It's like complaining about the free food your employer gives you, when there's nothing stopping you from getting your own food elsewhere. (I admit that I've been guilty of that on occasion, but at least I don't write articles - from a libertarian/anarchist POV - about how the government owes me convenient garbage disposal.)
* I think that they'd quickly find out that skipping every other house on the block because they aren't a customer isn't very cost-effective, instead.*
I don't understand why. This is exactly how trash pickup in my area works: there are multiple companies and they only pickup for their own customers. To add insult to injury, I live in a very low-density rural county. Since these guys have been in business for years, I have to assume they're profitable!
Garbage is already a big externality. A positive one. The government takes care of hauling away your trash and disposing of it, somewhere, and you get to benefit from the economies of scale of centralizing this.
The truly individualist, libertarian thing to do with your garbage is not to leave it on the curb for the government to pick up. It's to bury it in your backyard.
What's that you say? "Not in my back yard"?
I had a couple actual questions buried in the snark. Is it still legal to bury trash in your own back yard, on your own property, assuming you take the necessary precautions to prevent it from seeping into groundwater? And if so, would you - or the article's author - do so?
And if someone wanted to start a garbage collection corporation, using land they own, that they've lined so it doesn't leech into groundwater, and hauling away garbage with their own trucks, would the government stop them? I don't think so, but I dunno if it's ever been tried. I think that they'd quickly find out that skipping every other house on the block because they aren't a customer isn't very cost-effective, instead.
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to externalize costs back onto the population if they initially came from the population. It's like complaining about the free food your employer gives you, when there's nothing stopping you from getting your own food elsewhere. (I admit that I've been guilty of that on occasion, but at least I don't write articles - from a libertarian/anarchist POV - about how the government owes me convenient garbage disposal.)