Talk:Free-market roads

Bias
This article is completely slanted to one side of the argument. Additional research and citations should support both sides, along with the complete removal of all weasel words. • Freechild   'sup?   13:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, very slanted. The "in favour" and "against" sections should be composed arguing logically for their case. Counterarguments of course are reasonable but should be presented equally in each section. Arguably society has voted by supporting politicians that support largely public roads. Perhaps the largest disadvantage of private roads (asymmetrical information - how do road users reasonably inform themselves about their road market options and costs?) is not mentioned at all. PhotoJim 23:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PhotoJim (talk • contribs)

So write about it. byelf2007 (talk) 12 July 2011

Should arguments even be part of a wiki?
There's already a page dedicated to private roads. Does a wiki that lays out the arguments in support of private roads even have a place in an encyclopedia? Either way, I think I'm going to spend some time trying to neutralize the page. If it's decided the page is unnecessary, we can just delete it later. I think the counter arguments should be the first to go. There's no citations offering support, and they ruin the balance of the support section followed by the counter section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.126.166 (talk) 11:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a page on what a private road is, and this is the page on the theory that private roads are better than public roads. byelf2007 (talk) 12 July 2011

Is it correct to call Milton Friedman an Anarcho capitalist?
It seems like that part of the article is impossible for me to edit. I doubt Milton Friedman would prefer to be called an anarcho capitalist instead of a libertarian. He's not, as far as I know, in favor of individual sovereignty, private protection agencies etc. A quick google search has made me more confident that I'm right. The idea of privately operated roads does not, in any case, presuppose a commitment to the particular forms sovereignty.

From wikipedia: "Anarcho-capitalism (also referred to as “libertarian anarchy” by anarcho-capitalists,[1] “market anarchism,”[2] “free market anarchism”[3] or “private-property anarchism”[4]) is a libertarian[5][6] and individualist anarchist[7] political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favour of individual sovereignty in a free market. In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by voluntarily funded competitors rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. According to anarcho-capitalists, personal and economic activities would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics. Furthermore, victimless crimes would not be punished." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.10.104 (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Removed a bunch of Turkish advertising12.2.206.138 (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Free-market roads. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061215043310/https://www.lp.org/lpn/9801-highways.html to http://www.lp.org/lpn/9801-highways.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

copied
Much of this article appears to be copied directly from the source. Benjamin (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Community owned?
Right in the intro there's the phrase "community owned" which is never defined. It seems to have a very specific definition to libertarians, but without that definition or a link to a page about that, is horribly confusing. If a community is not a business entity (so an individual person or legal thing) then what is it? Presumably not the government due to the political theory, but what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.207.205.109 (talk) 02:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)