Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by anonuser123456 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

anonuser123456

Externalities and market freedom are completely different concepts.

A free market does not allow you to dump your garbage on public property, and no economist has ever argued that.

View on HN

And yet that is kind of what has happened for centuries. The most obvious example is the pollution of the rivers.

Incredibly non-capitalist systems also have people dumping garbage in public places and it’s against the law too.

How much does the free market charge companies that discharge CO2 into the atmosphere?

It differs from country to country. This is one system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_emission_trading

Oh, but it does as long as you can pay the fine. If a fine isn't significant enough or it is cheaper than getting rid of the waste, it simply becomes a cost of doing business. It doesn't matter that "no economist" has ever argued that.

Spend a few minutes on mises.org and you can probably find one.

Offtopic, but is mises.org considered a "smart" site, by libertarians? Like, I can tell that they think they're smart, or at least present themselves as if they think that, but is that considered true by lots of libertarians?

AFAIK, Mises.org is generally well regarded among libertarians.

Libertarians generally argue that externalities should either be illegal or taxed, when there are no other practical solutions. Here's a video of Milton Friedman on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YGfwSvLkC0

maybe, but at least one ecologist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_Hardin pretty much argued that was the end result of public property.

on edit: huh, I didn't know about British economist William Forster Lloyd, mentioned in the article, so I guess at least one economist has argued that it will happen (not though, that it is 'allowed' by)

In a completely free market there would be no public property, by definition.

Are you confusing "free market" with "capitalism"? The former just means the government isn't meddling in the market by doing stuff by setting prices or quotas. It's "capitalism" that deals with ownership, but even that doesn't exclude public ownership because it only talks about private ownership of production.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com