Limey
Member
- Nov 28, 2009
- 89
- 2
- 6
Now? I stated it yonks back, using it to demonstrate how you've misused economic definintions. A public good requires non-excludability and non-rivalry characteristics. We don't have "pure" public goods, given rivalry in consumption does, to some extent can occur (e.g. for roads, see congestion). The privatisation would lead to a destruction of the public good, given excludability would be enabled.Now you are claiming privatization of roads is the destruction of a public good in service of a private good but you have also argued privitatsation of the military is not such a case, yet any road building requires a state to exist, and the same intellectual, emotional, economic imperatives that would see private road building damage the public good would be by definition amplified by the privatization of a military necessary to keep the polity that those roads are built in alive.
The military starts with excludability. Privatisation therefore would not lead to a change in its nature as an 'economic good'. It might of course have some rather negative political repercussions. You'd have to use some alternative vocab, such as the belief its a 'merit good'