Car Monopoly: “Free Exchange: Road Hogs” Article Essay (Critical Writing)

Introduction

The object of the study is the article “Free Exchange: Road Hogs” published in The Economist.¹ The key thesis of this work is the fact that the role of the government in the market selling cars with autonomous vehicle systems is insignificant, and the monopolization of private corporations is a predominant ownership form. Such an assessment may be reasonable; however, based on the text of the article, some controversial points arise.

In particular, the involvement of innovative vehicles in the industry and public transport systems inevitably leads to interaction with the authorities. Also, a potential danger associated with inadequately tested autonomous driving systems entails monitoring by state agencies. Therefore, the role of the government in expanding the base of cars with autopilot and increasing their sales is more significant than stated in the work in question.

Government Involvement in Introducing of Autonomous Vehicles

The assessment of the objectivity of the arguments presented in this article is largely based on the rationales that the author suggests, and some of them are ambiguous, despite the relevance of the topic considered.² In particular, work does not disclose the flexibility of the system of payment for using specific vehicles in sufficient detail, and when evaluating such an opportunity, stakeholders should take into account the participation of the authorities. If certain agencies do not deal with the issue of tax regulation, it will create disagreements between car owners and private selling companies, which will be a threat to the future sales of products.

Another nuance that deserves a more detailed analysis is the aspect of government oligopoly. Haraguchi and Matsumura give an example of some Japanese companies and argue that with appropriate investments, state agencies are more active market participants than private firms.³ Contrary to the opinion of the article in question where the author assesses the role of the transport system as historically a sphere for implementing scale economies, the authorities’ intervention may have significant prospects.⁴ The active implementations of autopilot cars can strengthen the economy by involving investors, which will be beneficial for the treasury. Therefore, the role of the government is significant, and it is crucial to take it into account.

Transportation Load as Government Participation Scope

Based on the arguments of the article, the increased use of innovative vehicles is fraught with significant difficulty in traffic control.⁵ At the same time, when taking into account the role of the government in resolving this issue, it is necessary to consider the possibilities of providing control to eliminate this problem as the authorities’ direct responsibility. According to Haraguchi and Matsumura, economic support for social sectors, including transportation, is a significant aspect of government agencies’ activities.⁶ Consequently, despite the potential expansion of the autopilot vehicle base, the issue of traffic load should not be considered particularly acute.

Control of Private Property as a Part of Government Activity

The notion of private property as an object of control by government agencies requires detailed consideration due to concerns about the displacement of traditional vehicles. Following the text of the article, the cost of innovative cars servicing is the issue that affects the pricing system.⁷ However, any changes in the sphere of providing and distributing the technical base are subject to control by the authorities. If the market economy were based on the principle of the uncontrolled monopoly of private companies, the state treasury would not receive income. Therefore, the owners of innovative automobiles should not consider the problem of costly maintenance as an exclusive whim of manufacturers.

The evaluation of the article in question makes it possible to determine that, although the author mentions government roles, he or she pays insufficient attention to the aspects of the interaction of private firms with the authorities.⁸ The expansion of communication can help minimize the difficulties that introducing innovative products to the market causes. Engaging officials as stakeholders is a natural step to strengthen the business and ensure its stability. Therefore, the proposed thesis is relevant as a matter for more detailed consideration.

Conclusion

When summing up the analysis, it is possible to note that the article touches on a relevant topic, although some arguments regarding the involvement of the government are controversial. The role of the authorities in regulating and controlling the introduction of innovative vehicles as products for the replacement of traditional cars may be significant. The issues of managing private property and traffic load deserve more detailed discussion and ensuring fee flexibility is officials’ responsibility.

Bibliography

“Free Exchange: Road Hogs.” The Economist, 2018. Web.

Haraguchi, Junichi, and Toshihiro Matsumura. “Government-Leading Welfare-Improving Collusion.” International Review of Economics & Finance 56 (2018): 363-370.

Footnotes

1. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs,” The Economist, 2018. Web.
2. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs”.
3. Junichi Haraguchi and Toshihiro Matsumura, “Government-Leading Welfare-Improving Collusion,” International Review of Economics & Finance 56 (2018): 364.
4. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs,” The Economist, 2018. Web.
5. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs”.
6. Haraguchi and Matsumura, Government-Leading Welfare-Improving Collusion,” 369.
7. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs,” The Economist, 2018. Web.
8. “Free Exchange: Road Hogs”.