We haven't talked much about public goods. Typically these are provided by governments because the private market tends to underprovide them because the true costs and benefits of their use can not be determined. So that takes us to Detroit and poor Mattie, who was just sent to jail for contempt:
The elderly billionaire owner of Detroit's Ambassador Bridge has been jailed today for failing to meet court-ordered deadlines on a multimillion dollar construction project.
Manuel 'Matty' Moroun, along with company president Dan Stamper, has been sent to jail until his company complies with a 2010 court order to get the work on the $230m Gateway project done.
It is not yet clear how long the men will stay behind bars, but the work could take up to a year.
Detroit International Bridge Co. was declared in contempt of court in November for failing to finish work on the state ordered project linking the U.S.-Canada span with two Detroit interstates. (see here for rest of story)
He has made the bulk of his fortune from the bridge. Should something as vital as the Ambassador Bridge be held privately? How do you enforce changes necessary for the public good? How do you even determine what those changes are?
Don't worry about Mattie and his lawyer. The Court of Appeals let them out of jail late yesterday.
I don't think something as important as the Ambassador bridge should be privately held. The bridge needs to make repairs so that traffic doesn't have to exit the bridge. The company has put off the project and as a result has inconvenienced travelers. If the bridge was a public good the government would be responsible for the repairs and ideally that would mean they wouldn't have been put off for so long.
ReplyDeleteEven if the bridge was a publicly held good, the work may not have been done as quickly either. The government does not have have huge amount of funds for construction, although if they held control of the bridge they could properly distribute the revenue that would be gained from tolls paid for use of the bridge.
ReplyDeleteI think it's okay for the Ambassador bridge to be held privately. The Chicago Skyway is a fairly important and frequently used piece of road and I believe that it is privately held as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that the project would not necessarily have gotten done more quickly if it was publicly owned. Also, owning that kind of property is similar to owning a large business, some of which are used as frequently by the public as the road.
ReplyDelete