On Aug 11, 4:35*pm, "Default User" > wrote:
> blake murphy wrote:
> > On 10 Aug 2009 21:10:56 GMT, Default User wrote:
> > > That's another new thing, we used to be able to choose our own
> > > hauler. *I was a little ticked off at first by the single provider,
> > > but I have to say that it's actually cheaper now and includes
> > > single-stream recycling, which I didn't have before. My weekly
> > > amount of non-recyclable trash is so small that I just put a
> > > plastic "tall can" bag in the kitchen trash, then put that out on
> > > regular trash day.
> > what!?!?! *free-market competition was not the best solution?! *say it
> > ain't so!
>
> I was a bit surprised that the deal was significantly better. The main
> reason given for going to a single provider was to reduce traffic on
> the streets from trucks, and to get everybody complying with the
> county's new recycling mandate.

I'm not terribly surprised. Some services are naturally more efficient
as monopolies if for nothing else than economies of scale. The
difficulty is in avoiding monopolistic price-gouging. Ontario Hydro
for about 80-100 years was one such monopoly. Highly dependable
service at good rates as long as it was stricly supervised by an
honest government agency. Bell Canada funtioned much the same way.

Idiological free marketers broke up Hydro , privitised parts of it and
things have gotten worse since. On the other hand I don't want a
monopoly running the local corner stores.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada