Fish stocks in EU waters are rapidly depleting, its now a case of too many men chasing too few fish. Increased industrialisation of the process.
The depletion of fish stocks is a common problem as it threatens an important part of food supply.
There are those now who are being driven to destitution (and their families) with little hope of other local employment with the main asset (the boat and gear) now worthless. what is to become of them?
If no action is taken, in order to a) make profits or b) keep the head above water! fisherman, factory ships etc are going to keep fishing until the fish are gone.
the solution that is needed is a sustainable fish industry, that people can make a living from.
how is this c0mmon problem of limited resouces, and the consequences of inaction to be resolved through a libertarian framework.
First, let me say that I enjoyed the pun (intended or not) �I hope to be herring from you soon.:-) A libertarian solution would be based on property rights. The fishing area within the EU waters would be divided into specific sections and the commercial fishing rights to those sections would be auctioned at market price to fishermen. Using the inverse of Ardy�s commons analogy, if a fisherman knows that his and his family�s livelihood depends on not over-fishing his section and treating it in an environmentally safe manner, he will regulate his harvest so that reproducing stock are left for the next season. He may even compete with other fishermen to make his section more hospitable and attractive to the fish, especially if the fish he is after is a migrating species. Just as a farmer seeks to leave a family farm to his son in better condition than it was when his father left it to him (yeah, I know, most farmers are guys), so too would the owner of the right to fish a specific piece of the EU waters want to leave it to his son or daughter better than when he purchased it (yes it would be inheritable private property).
aye and theres the rub, if a road is neccessary to connect pint A and point B through C, but C happens to be an unwilling seller. this could have the consequence of having (an even more) inefficient road system, cause more expense on the builders from rerouting, the planning process for the new route would delay further the building of the road. or if all sellers were unwilling no road at all.
I suspect we have more roads than we need, but, if someone wishes to have a road built to connect to a commercial, social, or other development site he will have to decide how much the road is worth and make his offer accordingly. If someone along the way does not want to sell her property at what he is offering, she will probably sell at a higher price. If not, or if her price is too steep his choice is to go around her or cancel the project. One less piece of the environment not paved over.:-)
If by �unrepentant collectivists�, you mean individuals who wish to live or engage in voluntary association, there is nothing to stop them from doing so. They would still be subject to the law of the land, but as long as they are not violating the rights of others, there is no problem. If you are referring to political collectivists who would wish to continue to subordinate the rights of others to the will of the state, they will just have to get over it and enjoy exercising their own liberty.
Distortions of the market are those acts that cause a systemic misallocation of resources or an attempted abrogation of economic laws. Occasional or isolated distortions are going to happen in the imperfect world we live in. Let us not pretend that free markets would eliminate all bumps and dips in the economy, or that advocates of free markets claim it would.
this is the first time ive seen this said by you explicitly. I may have missed it, sorry if this is the case. so free market, not entirely free.
That would be mistaking a free market for a perfect market, Schlack. Yours, Issodhos
"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos