Looking back over my various blogs, I have approached this issue several times over the past 15 years. But it still comes up and there are different directions from which to look at it.
"There is no such thing as a free lunch." True. Even in a situation where you are outside of the societal economy (hiking in the woods in a non-park area where you have permissions to hunt/forage -- not sure many such places still exist), the lunch is paid for with time and energy to find, capture, prepare, and then eat the lunch.
But the phrase is more often used within a societal economy. You get a "free dinner" for listening to a lecture on how to prepare for retirement (part of a company's advertisement budget). You get a "free lunch" at a local food bank (paid for within the community's/individual's desire to help those who are less fortunate). Your company gives you "free snacks" or "free meals" to have while you are within the company building working on your assignments (paid for as part of overall "loaded" salaries).
The point is that you can get a free lunch -- defined as not having to pay cash/credit at that time in order to enjoy the lunch. But, in the background, that lunch is included in the budget for some other individual/corporation/product.
This applies also to other services -- not just food. Public libraries are free to use. They are paid for by community taxes which have been allocated to something that the community has agreed is important. Although there are still some "subscription" fire fighting services in the world (including the US), most are public fire fighting services and have the same rules apply. The same goes for public police departments.
Within the community (the community can be local, county/parish/township, state, or federal), there is an agreement that the services benefit the community. Either it is desirable that everyone "should" make use of them (such as public libraries) or that they need to be available to everyone (police help, firefighters, etc.)
It is certainly possible to have all services as pay-for-use. All roads beyond your driveway can be "toll" roads where you have to specifically pay for them to use them (and, presumably, people without cars will not pay -- except as it exists as part of a delivery charge or ambulance charge, or service charge). If you want a book and services exchange point, become a member and you have access to library services. Want armed security? Pay for a guard service (more affluent people often want/need to have additional security above and beyond that provided by the community).
Sounds great, you say? Let people pay only for what they want to use. Sound fair? The problem is that individual choice does not always promote the best for the community. No public education -- only the better paid get education for their children and the group of uneducated gets larger and larger with each generation and the community soon does not have enough people who can keep the economy going. And that education has to continue to the point of having a sufficiently educated person to support the community.
No public police or fire capabilities? Now we're talking "insurance" -- people often bet that bad won't happen but, statistically, bad usually does happen eventually. The family collapses and the poor group expands once again. When something is needed for a community to prosper, it is better for the community to make certain that it is available.
Sometimes a "free" service may be provided as part of a specific product or environment. Other times, they may be investments for the future. In any case, it is not free as it is part of the overall costs in the background -- but they may be free for the individual who will either pay as part of overall fees/taxes or who use them to prepare for the future -- to be a productive member who can support the community which will then support the services.
No comments:
Post a Comment