Michael Munger on Traffic

EconTalk

Library of Economics and Liberty

Ethics, Philosophy, Economics, Books, Science, Business, Courses, Social Sciences, Society & Culture, Interviews, Education, History

4.7 • 4.3K Ratings

🗓️ 2 April 2018

⏱️ 74 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Does rush-hour traffic drive you crazy? Is a congestion tax on car travel a good idea? Michael Munger of Duke University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the economics of traffic and congestion taxes. It takes a while to get there (how appropriate!) but they eventually agree that a tax on congestion while reducing travel time is harmful to many drivers and may be best thought of as any tax placed on a particular good--a way to raise government revenue from the pockets of the consumers of that good.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Welcome to Econ Talk, part of the Library of Economics and Liberty.
0:08.0	I'm your host, Russ Roberts of Stanford University's Hoover Institution.
0:12.6	Our website is econtalk.org where you can subscribe, comment on this podcast, and find
0:17.6	links and other information related to today's conversation.
0:20.5	We'll also find our archives where you can listen to every episode we've ever done going
0:24.8	back to 2006.
0:27.0	Our email address is mailadycontalk.org.
0:29.0	We'd love to hear from you.
0:30.8	Today is March 6, 2018, and my guest is Michael Munger of Duke University.
0:40.2	This is his 34th appearance on eContalk.
0:44.2	He was last here in October of 2017 talking about permissionless innovation.
0:49.4	Michael, welcome back.
0:51.2	It's a pleasure to be on eContalk.
0:53.7	Our topic for today is traffic, or more accurately, perhaps traffic congestion prompted by a
0:58.1	recent article you wrote for Learn Liberty's website that we'll link to.
1:03.5	Our jumping off point is the idea that some people have proposed that Uber and other
1:07.7	rides sharing companies should have to pay a congestion fee in cities like New York, arguing
1:12.3	the driver spend time cruising around looking for riders, and that slows everyone else
1:15.7	down.
1:16.9	This is what economists call a negative externality, and the argument is that by imposing attacks,
1:21.8	Uber, its drivers lift, and its drivers, etc, will drive a little less, and that will reduce
1:26.5	congestion making people better off.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Library of Economics and Liberty, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Library of Economics and Liberty and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.