Just hooded student began writing his graffiti on the wall outside the Administration Building University of Valle another student approached him and without measuring consequences rebuked him for the damage to the heritage of this state school in Cali. Along with the hooded testified three people, one of which did not hesitate to respond: "Let him scratch it, what is the problem?, That again and painted-
The simple lines above describe the systematic behavior of individuals to state property. Tuesday was presented on the campus of the Meléndez third largest university of Colombia, in southern Cali, and was part of the unfortunate ones who staged disorders Students dissatisfied with the draft National Development Plan and some decisions of the university administration.
can easily question the speeches thrown by protesters, but not what concerns me at this time. What is questionable is the disdain with which players assume the public nature of certain goods, because in any case the question remains: is the public university a public or a public entity?, Suppose it is a public good nature "will to exclude and rival consumption?.; think now is a public entity, is exempt from design their control mechanisms and internal rules of the game?
To give advantage to some, I will think of that is a public good. The public university is part of the provision of public goods by the state. If we see this law, the law does not provide a blind eye and deaf ear to the damage to the commons. Finally, a damage to a state building will be paid with public money transfers from any level of government ultimately originated in the contributions of citizens of the nation. If we look now economically, can not see public education as seen on National Defense: defending one more individual is not a non-zero marginal cost, to defend a thousand is probably just to stand at 5 million, excluding how the army or the police to defend those who do not pay their and advocate services to which they contribute?, public education is based on a fundamental right, but not required to be an unlimited fine in their provision, have you thought prohibitive costs of hosting all the demand for university quotas the state system?, if done effectively rule out this condition is very high risk of failure.
How
resolve the issue? through an exclusion mechanism. No rival consumption because, for example, if a student uses linear algebra class is difficult to prevent another agent and the individual consuming the same kind of algebra simultaneously. But if it is not excluded is likely to generate congestion: a teacher can estimate the effort of his voice and its impact on academic achievement of all students optimally in a given area and with a size proportionate to attendees. If the number exceeds these estimates will require a greater space allocation (instead of a living will require an auditorium) and therefore the teacher may audiovisual equipment required in addition to per capita cost of training a student.
So the university, in order to optimize their chances of limited resources and to promote the access of certain candidates who meet academic quality primary parameters, apply a protocol of admission and charge a price the student to obtain the actual duties as a member of the university community. Otherwise, it is likely that an untalented student and avid of pride wants to study engineering even if the failure is assured under these conditions, resulting in congestion and consuming resources (congestion in the library service, computer service, newspaper, restaurants), likewise, in order to maintain uniform behavior within the facilities of the University, be a set of rules.
Why rules in a good community use? just such rules, in the words of North (1993), restrict individual behavior that eventually, if not controlled, would generate negative externalities. Chances are, if not restricted the use of snuff, smoke from this may adversely affect those who value little cigarette smoke. Therefore, it is possible to reach an agreement: to establish a smoking area, who value and do not feel negatively snuff emanation of smoke arising from their use. Similarly, it is likely that restrictions on the use of facilities seeking to avoid the abuse of these and minimize negative externalities. It's simple, why no agents involved in the consumption of goods that do not value enough internalize the costs caused by this situation?, Ideally one who consumes, internalize their costs. It can be for the payment of a tax, Pigovian style, to offset the negative externality caused or assuming that the consumption of the goods is only made in a place that reduce the effect on the other agents.
So either legally, something that I do not know specifically, or economically, an exhibition that I strive to do, regardless of whether the public university or not a public or a public entity private good characteristics, the need to demolish that argument synthetic flat and hollow suggesting that both the use and abuse are allowed in public places . Why not control the vehicle access to campus or why not make a closing of the public University grounds?, For the simple reason that, while management public is not free to seek the safety of workers and students. La Casa de Nariño is publicly owned, but what happens if is open? , it is likely that the President of the Republic with the medium approaches the village, but it is likely that a deranged in and kill him, would it be ideal?, I doubt it.
striking is the double standards of those who want to see in public the opportunity to empower themselves and impose their preferences arbitrarily (let's call signs or potential stakeholders). If his speech was coherent, why accept blocking an avenue for a protest, the public good in all its expression, being that affects many more than it benefits the blockade?: the behavior of the dictator, I call it, when the preferences of one or a few as are imposed on social preferences. OK to block the street but not accept to close the doors of the University who do not belong to it free access to its facilities is nonsense. It seems that, as often happens, when we stand up for justice outside the law, we are making the greatest act of injustice.
0 comments:
Post a Comment