18 Feb 15
The other day I was thinking about natural resources privatizations (a thing I oppose) and everything that it entails.
My thought process progressed and I ended up thinking about natural resources concessions. A kind of a PPP if you will.
Then I started to look for examples in the real world and I really couldn't find much about it.
I onky got two hits that I feel that are worth our time:
http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/71102.pdf
http://www.macauhub.com.mo/en/2009/08/05/7537/
As you can see both of them are related to air space concessions (the first is a little bit more than that) and that will be my focus.
Do you know or have any idea in how to get information about airspace rights concessions (if I could get a look at the contract between the São Tomé government and the kenyan consultants that'd be great)?
Do you about any sucessful example of natural resources concessions in the real world?
And finally what do you feel about this question?
18 Feb 15
Originally posted by adam warlockCan you explain more what you mean by 'natural resources privatizations'?
The other day I was thinking about natural resources privatizations (a thing I oppose) and everything that it entails.
In Zambia, we allow private companies to mine copper. Are you saying you think it should only be done by state owned companies?
18 Feb 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadI mean the exploration of natural resources by private companies that have no obligation to give back to society when their profits are evidently a national wealth.
Can you explain more what you mean by 'natural resources privatizations'?
In Zambia, we allow private companies to mine copper. Are you saying you think it should only be done by state owned companies?
As for your second question: My real answer is that in principle I feel that government entities should be the first ones that had the right to explore natural resources. But my main focus isn't even that governments should explore natural resources. My main focus is that natural resources explorations should always be done with the end goal that the general should benefit directly from the exploration (obviously I'm not saying that the gross of the profits should go to the exploration, but that some of them [b]should[/d] go in a very direct way - no trickle down nonsense) of the resources. Or else it will be exploitation and not exploration.
20 Feb 15
Originally posted by adam warlockMy Fidelity Natural resources fund made money for many years, who wouldn't love that.. not standing in the cold Alaskan frontier mining for gold, but still sharing the profits.
I mean the exploration of natural resources by private companies that have no obligation to give back to society when their profits are evidently a national wealth.
As for your second question: My real answer is that in principle I feel that government entities should be the first ones that had the right to explore natural resources. But my main focu ...[text shortened]... no trickle down nonsense) of the resources. Or else it will be exploitation and not exploration.
The state of Alaska gives each resident a check for oil revenue each year. Now Colorado is talking about doing the same with taxes on the Marijuana, by giving back to the residents there.. not sure that is a great idea,, but It could be better than letting government bureaucrats spend it studying a minnow.... ?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
20 Feb 15
Originally posted by Hugh Glass"...giving back to the residents there.. not sure that is a great idea,"
My Fidelity Natural resources fund made money for many years, who wouldn't love that.. not standing in the cold Alaskan frontier mining for gold, but still sharing the profits.
The state of Alaska gives each resident a check for oil revenue each year. Now Colorado is talking about doing the same with taxes on the Marijuana, by giving back to the residen ...[text shortened]... ea,, but It could be better than letting government bureaucrats spend it studying a minnow.... ?
Right. State and public dependency on the financial health of one major industry can backfire big time.
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by adam warlockYou might want to examine this from the standpoint of praxeology of Austrian economics.
The other day I was thinking about natural resources privatizations (a thing I oppose) and everything that it entails.
My thought process progressed and I ended up thinking about natural resources concessions. A kind of a PPP if you will.
Then I started to look for examples in the real world and I really couldn't find much about it.
I onky got ...[text shortened]... ural resources concessions in the real world?
And finally what do you feel about this question?
Try to define "public goods" in a way that doesn't end up twisting logic on its head. The most often cited "public good" that can't be private is security.
In some ways, I applaud Sarah Palin's actions which secured an annual check for every resident of Alaska from the Oil industry, but from a more reasoned and principled standpoint, the action isn't strictly logical or fair.
The great majority getting this state stipend have little or no title to that oil or its profits. The single entity called government is usually the recipient and beneficiary of so called "public goods" and usually benefits from a monopoly position, or legal exclusion of competitors.
Not being argumentative, but just dense, what is a PPP?
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by adam warlockIn the example of the Alaskan oil fields, the "giving back" takes the form of providing high paying jobs to a great many people in a State where due to geography business is sparse.
I mean the exploration of natural resources by private companies that have no obligation to give back to society when their profits are evidently a national wealth.
As for your second question: My real answer is that in principle I feel that government entities should be the first ones that had the right to explore natural resources. But my main focu ...[text shortened]... no trickle down nonsense) of the resources. Or else it will be exploitation and not exploration.
I do think that an Alaskan refinery would be in order, so that the remote areas of that State could get fuel they need at much lower prices than are current up there.
21 Feb 15
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignI imagine jobs / business are sparse in most of the great wilderness areas remaining on our planet. These are wilderness areas due to geography of course.
In the example of the Alaskan oil fields, the "giving back" takes the form of providing high paying jobs to a great many people in a State where due to geography business is sparse.
I do think that an Alaskan refinery would be in order, so that the remote areas of that State could get fuel they need at much lower prices than are current up there.
21 Feb 15
Originally posted by normbenignA public private partnership. A kind of a deal between a government(s) agency(ies) and a private party(ies) that can have very different ways of being conducted.
Not being argumentative, but just dense, what is a PPP?
For example a contract can be signed between my company and the Government of Washington where I take the management of the international airport (and all activities that are related to it), whose construction I'll be responsible for, for 50 years while agreeing that from the 10th year onwards I have to give back 5% of the profits to the state agency.
22 Feb 15
Originally posted by adam warlockActually I believe 'exploitation' is the correct word throughout your post. Exploration implies just finding out where the resources are located. Exploitation means making use of them.
Or else it will be exploitation and not exploration.
So what do you include as 'natural resources'?
Fishing grounds in coastal waters? Should all fishermen pay a 'natural resources tax' to the government to be distributed to the people?
What about farmers. Do you support Mugabe's program of redistributing farm land? (in principle, not in actual method). Should farmers in all countries pay a 'natural resources premium' for the use of the land?
Solar panels: should all users of solar panels pay a premium for the sunlight they are using?
22 Feb 15
Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually I believe 'exploitation' is the correct word throughout your post. Exploration implies just finding out where the resources are located. Exploitation means making use of them.
So what do you include as 'natural resources'?
Fishing grounds in coastal waters? Should all fishermen pay a 'natural resources tax' to the government to be distribute ...[text shortened]... ?
Solar panels: should all users of solar panels pay a premium for the sunlight they are using?
So what do you include as 'natural resources'?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resource
Should all fishermen pay a 'natural resources tax' to the government to be distributed to the people?
Why not make grassroots organizations that make sure that people that use natural resources give back to their communities? Why involve the government at all? Obviously I don't think that people that are just making a living out of fishing should pay any taxes. Big entities however that not only profit out of fishing and also have environmental impact should give back accordingly. The details of this giving back should be well thought out, but again for me just talking about, jobs, taxs and trickle down wouldn't cut it.
Do you support Mugabe's program of redistributing farm land? (in principle, not in actual method).
I don't know enough about Mugabe's land distribution plan to know if I agree with it on principle or not. However I do know that the concept of private property is abhorrent and that the land should owned collectively. Again the datails have to be fleshed out and I'm in hurry to do it in this forum.
Should farmers in all countries pay a 'natural resources premium' for the use of the land?
Analogous answer from your fishermen quesntion.
Solar panels: should all users of solar panels pay a premium for the sunlight they are using?
No! They aren't draining the sun so why should they? Paying for a premium on using solar power is more or less equivalent to having privatized the Sun and for me that is ludicrous.
Care to answer my questions now:
Do you know or have any idea in how to get information about airspace rights concessions (if I could get a look at the contract between the São Tomé government and the kenyan consultants that'd be great)?
Do you about any sucessful example of natural resources concessions in the real world?
And finally what do you feel about this question?