= What if a resource is limited within a region? For example, water?
{id=water}
Today, shipping costs are so low (eg., \$0.50 per kg for US-China shipments) that for most goods, the market is global.
But what if the main water supply in a region is owned by a single entity, and they charge exorbitant prices? Unlike food, bringing in water from faraway regions would be too expensive. Of course, people moving out would result in the entity going out of business and selling the water supply to someone more rational, but due to various reasons, moving out isn't always easy.
Here's the true solution. Currently, the water supply in most countries is owned by the government. Upon transition to libertarianism, the water supply in each region would simply be an entity with ownership distributed among the residents. If some of them sell their shares of the water supply to a company that then jacks up the prices, they'll have to move out, but that is simply them facing the consequences of risking putting their water supply in another's hands.
What if the water supply was sold by the government to a private entity currently subject to regulations? Would a libertarian transition remove those regulations? Note that this situation is caused by having to transition from big government to libertarianism. If a libertarian society arose naturally, rights to natural resources would be distributed among the community via the principle of homesteading. And as before, anyone selling their rights must be moving or have another source ready, othewise accept the potential consequences.
To fix the issues caused by a non-libertarian government, non-libertarian measured may be needed. The government had no right to the water, nor to sell it to the private entity. It may need to be taken back.
Back to article page