Often, when someone hears this claim, they respond, “If supporting government is voluntary, nobody would volunteer.” Such a statement is wrong, both factually and philosophically.įactually, even with today’s oppressive taxation, millions of individuals provide voluntary support for the legitimate and proper functions of government-the police, the courts, and the military. Without the use of coercion, government funding would have to be obtained through voluntary means. In truth, there is no “free rider problem” in regard to any product or service.Ĭonsider taxation, which should be abolished. If government quit forcing taxpayers to pay for the health care of the needy, the “free rider problem” in health care goes away. Nobody should be forced to pay for anything against his own judgment. While this is true, it begs the question: should taxpayers be forced to pay for the health care of those who cannot afford to pay themselves? The answer is NO. The “free rider problem” only arises when government is involved.įor example, it is argued that those who do not have health insurance are a burden to tax payers.
For example, while it is argued that public parks are necessary because of free riders, Disney World has no problem excluding those who will not pay. Interestingly, the “free rider problem” does not arise with private businesses. The free rider problem is the question of how to limit free riding (or its negative effects). The free rider may withhold effort or resources, or may impose the costs of his or her activities on others. In economics, collective bargaining, psychology, and political science, a free rider (or freeloader) is someone who enjoys the benefits of an activity without paying for it. Wikipedia describes the “free rider problem” as:
Advocates of a number of government interventions often argue that such measures are required to deal with the “free rider problem.” Indeed, Mitt Romney has called his insurance mandate in Massachusetts a “free rider surcharge.”
0 kommentar(er)
