Let me modify what I said:

I think the situation is more complicated than munger portrayed it. My reference probably has similar bias. It makes it difficult to trust one or the other

8/25/2010 11:02:14 PM

Well, from what you quoted, the two do not necessarily disagree. Munger was speaking of his personal experience with Santiago's private bus system at least ten years after the 1991 reorganization, the last time mentioned in your quote. As they touched on in the podcast, but was discussed at length in the book mentioned, the fractious nature of curb rights in Santiago was never properly addressed, leading to chariot races and widespread oversupply, which had to be paid for.

8/26/2010 9:52:23 AM

Quote :

"the fractious nature of curb rights in Santiago was never properly addressed, leading to chariot races and widespread oversupply, which had to be paid for. "

Which seem pretty minor and with some very slight regulations (and enforcement) could be taken care of (the same goes for making the pollution problem better, he claims).

But he never mentions other problems with the system, namely the cartels that developed and that urban fares increased. Granted some of this is the government's fault because they didn't step in and break up some of the bus associations.

http://www.econ.uchile.cl/uploads/publicacion/ecc733aa-519e-4d50-81d5-06d39afdf693.pdf
See page 8 for more on the cartels/associations and page 13 for a table of increasing fares

Quote :

"Munger was speaking of his personal experience with Santiago's private bus system at least ten years after the 1991 reorganization"

which I guess I have a bit of a problem with. He's nostalgic for the private system that he wasn't even there to witness or experience, yet he's so sure that its so much better than the current system.








I don't want to derail the thread, because this doesn't necessarily deal with transportation, but there is still a pretty big elephant in the room for me that I think deserves mentioning.

Most of Chile's privatization strategies were implemented by military dictator Pinochet (who was put into power allegedly with the help of the CIA) with the STRONG encouragement of the IMF. This has happened all over Latin America. Countries get in debt crises and then require IMF loans. In order to secure the loan, IMF strategies have to be put into place (privatization and other neoliberal policies). The result is usually foreign owned industries and the deconstruction of previous regulations (like environmental and labor laws). In the case of Chile, the new policies weren't a success at all for the poor and indigenous.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-chichile.htm
http://www.coha.org/chile-less-than-meets-the-eye/

8/26/2010 2:03:05 PM

Quote :

"namely the cartels that developed and that urban fares increased"

The cartels developed as an attempt to deal with the oversupply and fare collapse caused by the curb rights problem. As for the fare increases, it is unclear whether this was actually a problem, or merely the elimination of overt public subsidies. For example, if the government of Cuba privatized the grocery store market, there is no question that prices would rise. At the same time, I trust you would agree that private grocery distribution is preferable, meaning the poor should be subsidized directly, either with transit vouchers or cash, not by nationalizing Food Lion.

Quote :

"which I guess I have a bit of a problem with. He's nostalgic for the private system that he wasn't even there to witness or experience, yet he's so sure that its so much better than the current system."

Well, he did interview a lot of people that used it, and the president of the country did say they were sorry about it, and the statistics spoke volumes (commute times increasing from 40minutes to 2hours) and the dramatic increase in public expenditure for reduced service.

As to your elephant, I am fully in favor of countries refusing IMF assistance. It would be even better if such assistance was never offered. Western banks need to suffer the consequences of their risky lending practices.

8/26/2010 3:12:04 PM

But even in Britian (outside of London), where the curb rights are much better, there is still a problem with monopoly. The larger companies make it extremely difficult for new entrants using bus wars, etc.

You're probably right about the increasing fares and lack of subsidy (atleast that played some role in increasing prices).


As for the increased commute time and reduced service, I think this may have had to do with the country trying to solve the pollution problem in Santiago, or this atleast played a role. The city planners wanted buses to radiate around the metro lines and feed the metro which would be the major artery of transport. The idea being that eliminating the buses that ran along the metro would cut down on congestion and the associated pollution. Unfortunately, the metro has too small of a capacity for the huge population. This is just speculation though.

Thats assuming you can solve the pollution problem in a city that big and dense (with the associated temperature inversion making things worse).

No doubt it was a mistake, it certainly had to be if a politician apologized! I would say it was an honorable attempt to try and alleviate some of the pollution problems, still the people of Santiago deserved the apology, if not more.







Its good to hear you aren't a fan of the IMF either, maybe one day we can do away with it or atleast give third world countries a better seat at its table. Plenty of self-described "free-marketers" I have talked with do support it (often strongly), to which I usually respond by grouping them with corporatists.

[Edited on August 26, 2010 at 5:27 PM. Reason : to , too, two]

8/26/2010 5:22:30 PM

Hahahaha, what the hell is this thread?

Is this just another failed argument that has turned into a "hey, just stating some facts, not my fault if you think I'm doing for a reason other than stating some facts" thread.

8/30/2010 6:17:08 PM

Every time I see this thread and read Riddled with... I think:

8/30/2010 6:24:47 PM

RIDDLE ME THIS, SOAP BOX. SHOULD WE GET RID OF PLACES WHERE CRIMES OCCUR?

8/30/2010 8:34:59 PM